A piece of lost history: Max Weber and Lowell L. Bennion

This article discussesMax Weber’s Methodology, Lowell L. Bennion’s (1933) published doctoral dissertation from the University of Strasbourg, France. This book is important because it is the first systematic English language treatment of Weber’s work. It also suggests an early link between Weberian and Durkheimian scholarship and foreshadows later debates regarding Talcott Parsons’ interpretation of Weber. Additionally the book provides a unique contribution by applying Weber’s “Calvinism-Capitalism” thesis to the development of Mormonism. We explore the academic context in which the book was written and its reception by American sociologists at the time. After summarizing the text, we examine its perspective on the issues later raised about Parsons’ account of Weber. We conclude by looking at Lowell Bennion as a sociologist and a devout Mormon, and the unique connection that he forged between his religion and Max Weber’s ideas. Her field is organizational behavior and theory; her primary area of research is the relationship between organizational hierarchy and managerial leadership. He is currently investigating the modes of white collar resistance in public bureaucracies.     

A social world of sociology in Japan

This article discusses the characteristics, problems, and future direction of sociology in Japan. The core problem of the discipline is the disparity between theories and empirical studies. That is, sociologists in Japan are not yet accustomed to the practice of integrating both conceptual inquiry and empirical methods—which has resulted in futile research that is unable to influence social policies. This article explores this problem by surveying historical and institutional circumstances that have surrounded sociologists since the founding of the discipline. The issues discussed include: the birth of the discipline, the rule of the academy by prominent universities, the system of funding, and the practice of recruitment. By suggesting problems that should be dealt with by today’s sociologists, the article indicates the road that sociologists must follow to rise above their “TV commentator” image and take on more influential social roles as professional experts.     

“We am a virtual community”

Conclusion In summary, we are present at the birth of something special. Sociologists have an opportunity to observe the self-creation of electronic, virtual communities. While the development of conventional communities occurred over a time period so vast that we are denied records of their origins, the pace of evolution among today’s virtual communities is so fast as to make “keeping up” almost impossible. Fortunately, it is occurring in a medium that supports easy documentation—witness the ease with which I could report on netiquette by copying materials directly off the net. I find it difficult to terminate an article on the Internet since the phenomenon is still unfolding as I type this sentence. My own experience of the net is far different now than it was when I began this article just a few weeks ago. It will be radically different by the time you read this. Anyone who feels the future evolution of the Internet is fairly predictable should meditate on the fact that it’s chief supporters in government appear to be Al Gore and Newt Gingrich, an electronic odd couple. He is also the author ofThe Practice of Social Research and other textbooks.     

“Status! Yes!”: Tom Wolfe as a sociological thinker

The journalist Tom Wolfe draws heavily upon sociology in his works, yet sociologists have largely ignored his writings. This article argues that Wolfe’s journalism presents a coherent vision of contemporary society which emphasizes the importance of what has become a neglected sociological concept—status. Wolfe argues that economic expansion after World War II fostered the emergence of new “statusspheres,” and encouraged status competition. Wolfe treats issues of religion, character, and politics within the framework of status. His work should remind sociologists of the importance of status and the role of irony as a stance for sociological analysis. The author thanks Anne Bowler, Kathleen Lowney, and Lawrence T. Nichols for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.     

Why are professors liberal?

The political liberalism of professors—an important occupational group and anomaly according to traditional theories of class politics—has long puzzled sociologists. This article sheds new light on the subject by employing a two-step analytic procedure. In the first step, we assess the explanatory power of the main hypotheses proposed over the last half century to account for professors’ liberal views. To do so, we examine hypothesized predictors of the political gap between professors and other Americans using General Social Survey data pooled from 1974–2008. Results indicate that professors are more liberal than other Americans because a higher proportion possess advanced educational credentials, exhibit a disparity between their levels of education and income, identify as Jewish, non-religious, or non-theologically conservative Protestant, and express greater tolerance for controversial ideas. In the second step of our article, we develop a new theory of professors’ politics on the basis of these findings (though not directly testable with our data) that we think holds more explanatory promise than existing approaches and that sets an agenda for future research.     

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.     

A Nobel Trinity: Jane Addams,Emily Greene Balch and Alva Myrdal

The aim of the paper is to present unusual achievements of three women sociologists who won the Nobel Peace Prize. Its goal is also to contribute to a long standing discussion of the role sociologists as public intellectuals. By focusing on Addams, Balch and Myrdal’s scholarly and public life, the paper demonstrates what social scientists can offer in the role of public intellectuals and debates what are the source of intellectuals’ public standing. The paper concludes by arguing that these three intellectuals’ successful achievement of their goals was possible because of their professional credential and because of their courage to take on risky actions for purposes to institutionalise social or cultural change.     

Sociology and the environment: An analysis of journal coverage

Many sociologists have suggested that the dominant paradigm in sociology ignores the environment, which accounts for the fact that environmental sociology is poorly represented in sociology’s mainstream journals. The purpose of this article is to test this assumption empirically by examining the coverage of environmental sociology in nine mainstream sociology journals from 1969 through 1994. The nine journals are separated into two tiers, representing higher and lower prestige journals. Each environmental article is categorized by its area (attitudes and behaviors, environmental movement, political economy, risk, and “new human ecology”) and whether it involves “sociology of the environmental issues” (the application of standard sociological perspectives to environmental issues) or “core environmental sociology” (the examination of societal-environmental relationships). We find that less than two percent of all articles published in the sampled journals in the twenty-five-year period of study were environmental, and that the higher tier journals were less likely to publish environmental articles than were the lower tier journals. Environmental articles were more likely to be part of “core environmental sociology” after 1981 than they were “sociology of the environmental issues,” which suggests a greater recognition among both environmental sociologists and journal reviewers that human societies are ecosystem-dependent. The number of environmental articles increased in the 1990s, portending a fruitful period for sociologists specializing on the environment. We argue that the broader field of sociology can benefit by recognizing the linkages environmental sociology has to other sociological specializations and that, ultimately, sociology needs to be able to address environmental variables in order to understand society. Naomi T. Krogman’s primary interest is in stakeholder framing of environmental disputes and natural resource policy change. She is currently a research sociologist at the Center for Socioeconomic Research at the University of Southwestern Louisiana and adjunct faculty in the Department of Sociology, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504-0198. JoAnne DeRouen Darlington is a research sociologist focusing on social change and community sustainability emerging from the disastrous interactions between society and the environment. She is currently employed with the Natural Hazards Research Center, Campus Box 482, Boulder, CO 80309.     

The Sociological Literature on Nuclear Issues*

In this paper we address the question of the existing and potential role of sociologists in the nuclear debate by first sketching some of the major nuclear issues, second by guaging the extent of professional attention which sociology has focused on nuclear issue. Our focus is on the professional sociological literature. In addition to it there is a vast peace literature which ranges from academic studies to newsletters and propaganda pieces. Sociologists may contribute heavily to the peace literature and be active in the peace or relatede campaigns, but we exclude these activities from our study. We view them as actions which sociologists do in their roles of concerned citizens. Our focus here is on the professional sociological literature and our comments pertain solely to it. We select thirteen journals to represent various aspects of this literature and review all issues from 1945 to the present to guage the coverage of nuclear issues in the sociological literature.     

Whither Tocqueville in American Sociology?

This essay addresses the declining influence of Alexis de Tocqueville on contemporary American sociology. While Tocqueville was must reading some decades ago, inspiring several classic sociological studies published in the 1950s and 1960s, and while he remains an authoritative source in other social science disciplines, he has virtually disappeared from present-day sociology. Sociologists, it would seem, have left behind works such as Democracy in America and The Old Regime and the French Revolution despite Raymond Aron’s (Main Currents in Sociological Thought, vol. I, Anchor Books, New York, 1968) insistence that Tocqueville be counted among the discipline’s founders. While Meyer (J. Cl. Socio., 3:197–220, 2003) presumed to have addressed this subject, his argument sheds no light on the matter as he ignores the driving concern of Tocqueville’s work, namely, the tensions between the principle of equality and human freedom. I argue that conceptually sociologists today are in no position to reflect critically on equality and its relation to freedom. Since the turbulent 1960s egalitarian commitments have become embedded in the discipline and are thereby shielded from critical inquiry. At the same time, a conceptual fixation on power effectively pushed to the periphery the kinds of questions Tocqueville raised about the problem of authority in democracy and how authority may be encouraging of human freedom. Committed to advancing the principle of equality, however understood, and seeing nothing in authority but power, sociologists espouse faith in egalitarian, mass democracy whereas Tocqueville sought a critical understanding of it. This is much to the detriment of present-day sociologists, so many of whom demonstrate in their own work and professional behavior the democratic dilemmas Tocqueville warned us about.     

Whatever Will Happen to Industrial Sociology

Industrial sociology faces a renaissance if the leaves of social change can be read correctly. The permissive freedom of the 1960s and 1970s is being curtailed by some harsh economic realities. Parents and students alike are seeking the economic promise of job guarantees when the students graduate. Liberal arts education is on the defensive. Such training must demonstrate it has vocational opportunity or can be converted to such opportunity by postgraduate training. Sociologists who have had the freedom to do their own thing for 20 to 30 years are being forced to make some agonizing appraisals. The entire field of sociology has been placed under scrutiny. The drastic cuts in research funding are only one index of the governmental depreciation of sociology and most other social sciences. The loss of sociology majors and enrollments is another index of student and parental lack of confidence in sociology as a good investment. Academic sociologists who have placed applied sociology in a second-rate category are beginning to recognize that research training of graduate students must turn to applied training or jobs will not be available for many, if not most, of their graduate students. In a similar manner, research funding and graduate fellowships will not be available unless this change is made.     

Theorizing theory: Invitation to a broader conversation about ‘theory’ in sociology

‘Theory’ is a seminal term in sociology. Sociologists tend to ask that articles, chapters and monographs are ‘theoretical’, ‘develop theory’ or ‘make a theoretical contribution’. Yet, as demonstrated in Gabriel Abend’s 2008 article ‘The Meaning of ‘Theory’, it is generally unclear what sociologists mean when they talk about theory. Abend distinguishes seven different meanings sociologists tend to impute to ‘theory’ and argues that no single definition can usefully capture these substantively different meanings. Counter to Abend, we propose and defend a minimal and versatile theory of theory, which does capture the important common denominators in sociologists' various uses of the term theory. The major strengths of our proposal are that it enables informed and synthetic discussion and fosters reflexivity about differences and similarities between different types of theory. Our minimal theory of theory thus serves as an invitation to a broader conversation about theory in sociology.     

Sustainability and sociology

Sociologists have been slow to address directly the questions raised by the issue of sustainability, despite the prominence of the idea in other disciplines and policy fields. This article argues that sociologists are “missing the boat” by ignoring the questions that sustainability raises. In addition, it is suggested that sociology is uniquely equipped with the theoretical and methodological background to contribute scientifically accurate understandings of this phenomenon to a world much in need of such guidance. The article concludes that addressing questions of sustainability may nudge sociology into new and fruitful directions of inquiry. This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation grant number CMS-9312647, which is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks, also, to Gary Marx, Alice Fothergill and Sharon Erickson Nepstad.     

What’s Your Reality? Evaluating Sources and Addressing “Fake News”

It is important to know where the 2020 presidential candidates stand on today’s issues, but it’s also critical to know how they mobilize evidence to arrive at these opinions. What are their media diets? How do they decide what’s news? And how do they evaluate what news is true? What forms of expertise do they privilege in making decisions about reality? Sociologists, as experts ourselves, hold a particular stake in the answers to these questions. But when it comes to deciding what’s real, we also occupy a somewhat precarious position. We simultaneously privilege empiricism while recognizing the precarity and contingency of all knowledge.     

Scholarly ethics and courtroom antics: Where researchers stand in the eyes of the law

In 1993 the author, then a Ph.D. candidate in sociology, was jailed for 159 days after refusing to violate the American Sociological Association’sCode of Ethics provisions prohibiting the sharing of confidential research data with law enforcement authorities. This article discusses theCode, presents the facts of the case, answers critics of the author’s and the ASA’s stance, summarizes an attorney’s analysis of researcher’s rights in the eyes of the law, and concludes by urging sociologists to seek federal legislation protecting them and their work product from intrusions by public and private institutions. with emphases in environmental sociology, social movements, research methods, and science and technology at Montana State University.     

ASA certification as cooptation

We provide a brief overview of the American Sociological Association’s Ph.D. Certification Program and question the need for, and justification of, certifying sociologists. Essentially, the ASA certification mechanism, as implemented, is nonsociological, emphasizing presumed defects in the individual to the neglect of wider, systemic forces impinging on our discipline. If certification of sociologists is warranted, a view difficult to support given the small number of applicants for certification since 1986, we suggest departmental accreditation—a more sociological approach that emphasizes the value of the discipline, in and of itself. His research interests include political sociology, stratification and contemporary issues affecting the discipline. His research foci include rural and agricultural issues and the sociological employment market and profession.     

Graduate education

Graduate training in sociology is an uneasy compromise between teaching new sociologists what would be good for them to know and doing what a graduate department’s various constituencies demand. Instead of worrying about teaching a core of materials, the graduate faculty instead should teach students what they know, and try to help students learn what they want to know, as they come to define that during the course of their studies. Instead of requiring courses, faculty should develop a continuing dialogue with students and incorporate them, formally and informally, in their work. His most recent book isDoing Things Together (1986).     

Back to the future: Settlement sociology, 1885–1930

Between 1885 and. 1930, as sociology was becoming an academic discipline, sociology was also being practiced intelligently, innovatively, and self-consciously outside the academy in the social settlements that grew up in America’s major cities. In this paper, we first define and give a brief overview of the settlement movement in America; second, we show how the settlement workers were sociologists in their self-definition and action and in their relations with other sociologists; third, in the body of the paper, we describe the sociology done by the settlements in terms of the empirical research they undertook and the theory they created. Our argument is that settlement sociologists produced empirical studies that were both substantively significant and methodologically pioneer-ing; that they did so in terms of a coherent social theory unique in its focus on “the neighborly relation”; and that both their research and theory were part of a critical, reflexive, and activist sociology.     

Two main problems in the sociology of morality

Sociologists often ask why particular groups of people have the moral views that they do. I argue that sociology’s empirical research on morality relies, implicitly or explicitly, on unsophisticated and even obsolete ethical theories, and thus is based on inadequate conceptions of the ontology, epistemology, and semantics of morality. In this article I address the two main problems in the sociology of morality: (1) the problem of moral truth, and (2) the problem of value freedom. I identify two ideal–typical approaches. While the Weberian paradigm rejects the concept of moral truth, the Durkheimian paradigm accepts it. By contrast, I argue that sociology should be metaphysically agnostic, yet in practice it should proceed as though there were no moral truths. The Weberians claim that the sociology of morality can and should be value free; the Durkheimians claim that it cannot and it should not. My argument is that, while it is true that factual statements presuppose value judgments, it does not follow that sociologists are moral philosophers in disguise. Finally, I contend that in order for sociology to improve its understanding of morality, better conceptual, epistemological, and methodological foundations are needed.

---

What About Who is Mapping and Its Implications? Comments on Brent Never’s “The Case for Better Maps of Social Service Provision”

The term “mapping” has garnered a lot of attention in civil society research and nonprofit studies. Important contributions to mapping discussions have often focused on definitional issues, what to include and not include, what the data is intended for, and measurement challenges. However, the who is undertaking the mapping is often neglected in these discussions. This short article comments on Brent Never’s recent piece in Voluntas and the mapping of civil society and nonprofit organizations in general. Never’s analysis pushes the conversation forward by recommending better maps with both supply and demand of services for funders and policymakers at the local level. However, it neglects the question of who should conduct the mapping and the implications resulting from who these mappers are.