首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
Two main problems in the sociology of morality   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
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.
Gabriel AbendEmail:

Gabriel Abend   is a PhD candidate in sociology at Northwestern University. He works in the fields of economic sociology, culture and morality, theory, comparative and historical sociology, and the sociology of science and knowledge. In his dissertation, he investigates the social, cultural, and institutional history of business ethics since the late eighteenth century. In particular, he examines historical variations in conceptions of business ethics, and, more generally, in the boundary between “the economic” and “the moral.” His publications include: “Styles of Sociological Thought: Sociologies, Epistemologies, and the Mexican and US Quests for Truth” (Sociological Theory 24(1):1–41 March 2006); and “The Meaning of ‘Theory’” (Sociological Theory, forthcoming).  相似文献   

2.
Like all new research fields, the “new economic sociology” was produced by the redeployment of relatively diverse researchers under a single academic label. Academic entrepreneurs in the second half of the 1980s took up the traditional term of the European “founding fathers” claiming they were renewing the discipline while distinguishing themselves from (1) the old homegrown denomination “economy and society,” (2) anti-disciplinary currents such as neo-Marxism, and (3) interdisciplinary movements like “socioeconomics.” The relative unity of the new economic sociology was due more to this set of demarcations than to a specific intellectual approach. The new economic sociology obtained its scientific legitimacy by bringing together two promising new currents: network analysis and neo-institutionalism, along with a more marginal cultural mode of analysis. While there had been very little exchange among these currents, mutual references became more ecumenical once a common label had emerged and distinct intellectual programs were launched. Institutional legitimacy was quickly obtained thanks to the support of the Russell Sage Foundation, enabling a process of expansion that in Europe developed far more slowly. The case of the “new economic sociology” demonstrates that the creation of new subdisciplines cannot be understood merely through the analysis of direct interactions among persons linked to each other by inter-acquaintanceship. In accordance with a field theoretical approach, academic entrepreneurs function under structural conditions which must also be taken into account. Among these structural conditions were changes in the academic field itself (due to demographical effects, the imperialism of economics, and the surge in Business Schools) as well as in the political sphere (the rise of neo-liberalism).
Bernard Convert (Corresponding author)Email:
Johan HeilbronEmail:

Bernard Convert   is a sociologist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France) and at Lille University (CLERSE Laboratory). His current research interests are the sociology of education, economic sociology and the sociology of the Internet. Recent publications are a collective work, Repenser le marché (2003) and Les groupes professionnels et l’internet (with L. Demailly) (2006 in press). Johan Heilbron   is a sociologist at the Centre de sociologie européenne (CSE) in Paris and at Erasmus University in Rotterdam. Among his research interests are the historical sociology of the social sciences, economic sociology, the sociology of culture and transnational exchange. Recent book publications are The Rise of Social Theory (1995), The Rise of the Social Sciences and the Formation of Modernity (with L. Magnusson and B. Wittrock, 1998, paperback 2001), Pour une histoire des sciences sociales. Hommage à Pierre Bourdieu (with R. Lenoir and G. Sapiro, 2004).  相似文献   

3.
Although a central construct for sociologists, the concept of institution continues to elude clear and full specification. One reason for this lack of clarity is that about 50 years ago empirical researchers in the field of sociology turned their gaze downward, away from macro-sociological constructs in order to focus their attention on middle-range empirical projects. It took almost 20 years for the concept of the institution to work its back onto the empirical research agenda of mainstream sociologists. The new institutional project in organizational sociology led the way. Since then, scholars in this tradition have achieved a great deal but there is still much more to accomplish. Here, future directions for research are considered by reviewing how the concept of the institution has come to be treated by mainstream philosophers, sociologists of science and technology studies, and social network theorists.
John W. Mohr (Corresponding author)Email:
Roger Friedland (Corresponding author)Email:

John W. Mohr   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at Yale University. He has a longstanding interest in using formal network methods to analyze cultural meaning systems. Along with Roger Friedland, he is the organizer of the Cultural Turn Conference series at UCSB and the co-editor of Matters of Culture (Cambridge University Press 2004). He has published a number of articles on the formal analysis of meaning structures. His current research projects include a study of faculty change agents in higher education and the rise of nano-technology as a scientific project. This material is based [in part] upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Cooperative Agreement No. 0531184. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Roger Friedland   is Professor of Religious Studies and Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He co-authored with Harold Zelmann The Fellowship: Frank Lloyd Wright and the Taliesin Fellowship (2006), with John Mohr Matters of Culture (2004), and authored “Money, Sex and God: The Erotic Logic of Religious Nationalism” (2002). He is currently working on politicized religion as a case of institutional politics and on the relations among religion, sexuality, and love. His latest essay is “Institution, Practice and Ontology: Towards a Religious Sociology” to appear in Ideology and Organizational Institutionalism, Research in the Sociology of Organizations.  相似文献   

4.
Emirbayer and Johnson critique the failure to engage fully Bourdieu’s relational analysis in empirical work, but are weak in giving direction for rectifying the problem. Following their recommendation for studying organizations-in-fields and organizations-as-fields, I argue for the benefits of analogical comparison using case studies of organizations as the units of analysis. Doing so maximizes the number of Bourdieusian concepts that can be deployed in an explanation. Further, it maximizes discovery of the oft-neglected links among history, competition, resources, sites of contestation and struggle, relations of dominance and domination, and reproduction of inequality. Perhaps most important, case studies can identify the connection between macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors in the formation and shaping of habitus. To support my claims empirically, I draw from case study research (Vaughan The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA, 1996; Signals and interpretive work: The role of culture in a theory of practical action. pp. 28–56, 2002) that verifies Bourdieu’s as the “Theory of Practical Action” that supplies the micro-level component to the new institutionalism (DiMaggio and Powell, Introduction. pp. 1–41, 1991).
Diane VaughanEmail:

Diane Vaughan   is Professor of Sociology and International and Public Affairs at Columbia University. Her books include Controlling Unlawful Organizational Behavior (1983), Uncoupling (1986), and The Challenger Launch Decision (1996). Currently, she is completing Dead Reckoning: Air Traffic Control in the Early 21st Century and Theorizing: Analogy, Cases, and Comparative Social Organization.  相似文献   

5.
This article argues that while elements of Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology are increasingly employed in American sociology, it is rare to find all three of Bourdieu’s master concepts—habitus, capital, and field—incorporated into a single study. Moreover, these concepts are seldom deployed within a relational perspective that was fundamental to Bourdieu’s thinking. The article “Bourdieu and Organizational Analysis” by Mustafa Emirbayer and Victoria Johnson is a welcomed exception, for it draws on all three of Bourdieu’s pillar concepts to propose a relational approach to the study of organizations. It both reframes existing thinking about organizations, particularly from the neo-institutional and resource dependence schools, and indicates new directions for research in organizations to move. This paper evaluates their contribution calling attention to its many strengths and suggesting a few points that need future clarification and elaboration.
David L. SwartzEmail:

David L. Swartz   is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004). He is a Senior Editor and Book Review Editor for Theory and Society. His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory, and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu.  相似文献   

6.
Contemporary US labor solidarity faces new opportunities and challenges in the midst of global economic and governmental restructuring. Indicative of these changes the 1996 welfare reform has created a new brand of contingent government contract workers to implement welfare-to-work while simultaneously fostering contingent work among welfare clients. In this paper I use ethnographic data from a major city in New York State to explore the relative positioning of these labor groups and I ask whether contingent government workers could mediate between organized labor and welfare recipients, thereby facilitating political collaboration. I conclude by identifying considerable structural and interpersonal barriers to solidarity including lack of contingent worker consciousness, difference in “skill” levels, antagonistic relationships with clients and a tendency to interpret client hardships in terms of personal defects. I contrast these findings with instances where labor unions have become involved in welfare issues and propose steps toward a new paradigm for labor solidarity.
Frank RidziEmail:

Frank Ridzi   is Director of Urban and Regional Studies and Assistant Professor of Sociology at Le Moyne College. He has conducted research and written in the areas of social welfare policy, sociology of work, and student affairs. His recent work has appeared in such places as the Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, Research in the Sociology of Work, Review of Policy Research and the NASPA Journal of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.  相似文献   

7.
Using ethnographic data collected in the downtown nightlife of Athens, Georgia, we explore black males’ responses to being rejected from nightclubs via dress code enforcement in predominately white settings. We contrast these responses to the general experiences of other black males who gained access. Although race is a factor in the enforcement of dress codes, we find a fluid relationship between race, class, and taste that influences black males’ responses and experiences. We illustrate how the nuanced reality of lived racial and class experiences for many young black males problematize the narrow interpretation of a black cultural essence.
Kenneth Sean ChaplinEmail:

Reuben A. Buford May   is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Texas A&M University. His research areas include race and culture, urban ethnography, and the sociology of sport. He is the author of Living Through the Hoop: High School Basketball, Race and the American Dream (New York University Press, 2007) and Talking at Trena’s: Everyday Conversation at an African American Tavern (New York University Press, 2001). Kenneth Sean Chaplin   is a graduate student in the department of Sociology at Texas A&M University. His research interests include racial and ethnic relations and the sociology of sport.  相似文献   

8.
The social order of markets   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
In this article I develop a proposal for the theoretical vantage point of the sociology of markets, focusing on the problem of the social order of markets. The initial premise is that markets are highly demanding arenas of social interaction, which can only operate if three inevitable coordination problems are resolved. I define these coordination problems as the value problem, the problem of competition and the cooperation problem. I argue that these problems can only be resolved based on stable reciprocal expectations on the part of market actors, which have their basis in the socio-structural, institutional and cultural embedding of markets. The sociology of markets aims to investigate how market action is structured by these macrostructures and to examine their dynamic processes of change. While the focus of economic sociology has been primarily on the stability of markets and the reproduction of firms, the conceptualization developed here brings change and profit motives more forcefully into the analysis. It also differs from the focus of the new economic sociology on the supply side of markets, by emphasizing the role of demand for the order of markets, especially in the discussion of the problems of valuation and cooperation.
Jens BeckertEmail:

Jens Beckert   is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne. Book publications include Inherited Wealth, Princeton University Press, 2008; Beyond the Market: The Social Foundations of Economic Efficiency, Princeton University Press 2002; and the International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology (co-edited with Milan Zafirovski), Routledge 2006. His research focuses on the fields of economic sociology, sociology of inheritance, organization studies, and social theory.  相似文献   

9.
In the public sector, Canadian governments intervene frequently in labor disputes by suspending collective bargaining and curtailing legal strikes. Previous research has focused on the contours of government intervention, such as its overall effects on collective bargaining and strikes. The discussion highlights one actor, a government, restricting the behavior of another actor, a union, using legislation and policy making. As a result, we know less about more micro-level elements and implications of the process of government intervention. I address these themes using a detailed case study of the Alberta Teachers’ Association and the strikes it coordinated in 2002.
Yonatan ReshefEmail:
  相似文献   

10.
This paper draws upon the relational turn in the study of pain to understand and explain the ways in which professional wrestlers manage and make sense of physical suffering. The paper focuses on how pain-laden interactions in the ring and the gym give form to the ways in which participants of wrestling think and feel about pain. The research is based on a long-term ethnography of professional wrestling. The article does two things: (a) explores the bodily skills that wrestlers cultivate to handle a context of ever-present pain, and (b) explains what the wrestlers’ interactions tell us about the meanings of pain that wrestlers come to share. Based on the reconstruction of participants’ lived experience of pro wrestling, I suggest that pain becomes attractive to wrestlers because it is given substantive meaning which encompasses denial, authenticity, solidarity, and dominance.
R. Tyson SmithEmail:

R. Tyson Smith   is a Ph.D. candidate in sociology at SUNY Stony Brook. His research focuses on culture, gender, health and the media. He has published in Signs (2005), Advertising and Society Review (2005), Contexts (2006), and Social Psychology Quarterly (2008).  相似文献   

11.
By virtually dominating French intellectual life (literature, philosophy, culture) during the early post-World War II period, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) embodied what Pierre Bourdieu calls a “total intellectual” – one who responds to and helps frame public debate on all the intellectual and political issues of the day. During his lifetime and even after his death in 1980, Sartre’s thinking and political engagements provoked sharp reactions, both positive and negative, in France and abroad. Marxism, decolonization struggles, and violence are three key themes on which Sartre’s public positions continue to generate considerable debate – a debate that remains relevant today.
David L. Swartz (Corresponding author)Email:
Vera L. ZolbergEmail:

David L. Swartz   is Assistant Professor of Sociology and teaches in the Core Curriculum at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press, 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004). His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Swartz is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. Vera L. Zolberg   is Professor of Sociology at the New School for Social Research, New York City, where she has taught for over 20 years. In addition, she has taught at Purdue University, was visiting lecturer at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, held the Chair in Sociology of Art, University of Amsterdam, as Boekmanstichting Professor, and was visiting Research Associate at the CNRS in Paris. Zolberg has served as President of the Research Committee in the Sociology of the Arts of the International Sociological Association, and Chair of the Culture Section of the American Sociological Association. Among her publications are Outsider Art: Contesting Boundaries in Contemporary Culture, with J.M. Cherbo (Cambridge University Press, 1997); and Constructing a Sociology of the Arts (Cambridge University Press, 1990). She is co-editor, with David Swartz, of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004), and author of many articles. Her research interests include: contemporary and historical cultural policy and politics, urbanism and culture, museums, African art, and the sociology of collective memory. Zolberg is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society.  相似文献   

12.
Between 1909 and 1941, the Russell Sage Foundation (RSF) was actively involved in crafting and lobbying for policy solutions to the pervasive problem of predatory lending. Using a rich assortment of archival records, I build upon political learning theory by demonstrating how institutional conditions and political pressures – in addition to new knowledge gained through scientific study and practical experience – all contributed to the emergence and development of RSF experts’ policy ideas over the course of this 30-year period. In light of these findings, I suggest that policy ideas and political interests are mutually constitutive, and that the notion that ideas must be shown to operate independent of interests in order to “prove” that they matter in policymaking is misguided. Furthermore, I discuss the implications of the remarkable success of RSF’s policy proposals for current understandings of institutional change. In particular, I argue that the passage of RSF’s controversial Uniform Small Loan Law in 34 states suggests that political actors’ collective agency can produce significant policy reforms in a context of normal policymaking without the intervention of major destabilizing events.
Elisabeth AndersonEmail:

Elisabeth Anderson   is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Sociology at Northwestern University. Her areas of interest include political sociology, cultural sociology, theory, and comparative-historical methods. She is currently in the early stages of research for her dissertation, a cultural history of child labor policy reform in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany. She is also working on a project (with Bruce Carruthers and Tim Guinnane) that examines how policy experts operating outside the system of professions establish and defend authority by carving up jurisdictional space.  相似文献   

13.
The pleasure and danger of sexuality thematizes erotic desire as always accompanied by a certain anxiety. Although some anxiety is material and precautionary, I address the issue somewhat differently through investigating the psychic factors at play in the western imaginary. Discomfort with manifestations of erotic desire is most clearly invoked by differential embodiment where the challenge to the normative body not only results in disqualification from discourses of sexuality but also raises the contested question of who is to count as a sexual subject. My purpose is not to inquire empirically into the ways that people with disabilities are denied sexual subjectivity but to ask what is at stake in the cultural imaginary that requires such a closing down of possibilities. I develop a psychoanalytic approach to sexually marked anomalous embodiment and ask what part the link between desire and lack plays in thwarting a positive model of disability and sexuality.  相似文献   

14.
A new version of the age-old controversy between religion and science has been launched by today’s intelligent design movement. Although ostensibly concerned simply with combating Darwinism, this new creationism seeks to drive a “wedge” into the materialist view of the world, originating with the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus and manifested in modern times by Darwin, Marx, and Freud. Intelligent design proponents thus can be seen as challenging not only natural and physical science but social science as well. In this article, we attempt to explain the long history of this controversy, stretching over millennia, and to defend science (especially social science) against the criticisms of intelligent design proponents – by defending science’s materialist roots.
Brett Clark (Corresponding author)Email:
John Bellamy FosterEmail:
Richard YorkEmail:

Brett Clark   received his Ph.D. from the University of Oregon and is the Editorial Director of Monthly Review Press. His research interests are ecology, political economy, and science. He has published articles and review essays in Theory and Society, The Sociological Quarterly, Organization & Environment, and Critical Sociology. He received the 2007 Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association for a series of articles (one of which was the article “Carbon Metabolism: Global Capitalism, Climate Change, and the Biospheric Rift,” published in Theory and Society in 2005) with Richard York. John Bellamy Foster   is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of Monthly Review (New York). He is the author of The Theory of Monopoly Capitalism (1986); The Vulnerable Planet (1994); “Marx’s Theory of Metabolic Rift,” American Journal of Sociology (1999); Marx’s Ecology (2000); Ecology Against Capitalism (2002); Naked Imperialism (2006); and (with Paul Burkett) “Metabolism, Energy, and Entropy in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy,” Theory and Society (2006). Richard York   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and co-editor of the Sage journal Organization & Environment. His research focuses on human interaction with the natural environment and the philosophy, history, and sociology of science. He has published articles in American Sociological Review, Gender & Society, Rural Sociology, Social Problems, Social Science Research, Sociological Forum, The Sociological Quarterly, Theory and Society, and other scholarly journals. He has twice (2004 and 2007) received the Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association.  相似文献   

15.
This article analyzes how China’s increasing engagement in the global market induced significant institution-building in China’s tobacco industry and enabled a power shift from the local authorities to the central authority in controlling this market. During this process of “getting onto the international track,” the central government reorganized the industrial tobacco system and broke up the “monopolies” set up by local governments in order to enhance the competitive capacities of China’s tobacco industry in the global market. Given such a concrete institutional change in China’s tobacco industry, I propose the theory of “global-market building as state building” to explain the interactions among the global market, the nation-states, and the domestic market-building projects. I suggest that nation-states strategically seek to engage themselves in the global market and that, under certain circumstances by taking advantage of their global market engagement, the nation-states can enhance their abilities to govern the domestic market.
Junmin WangEmail:

Junmin Wang   received her Ph.D. in Sociology from New York University in 2007. During 2007–2008, she was a post-doctoral fellow in China’s political economy at the Research Center for Chinese Politics & Business of Indiana University at Bloomington. Currently, she is Assistant Professor of Sociology in the University of Memphis. Wang’s main research interests include economic sociology, formal/ complex organizations, political sociology, comparative/ historical sociology, international political economy, and China Studies. She has published articles and book chapters on China’s political economy, state/market transitions, and the institutional changes of Chinese firms. Wang is currently working on a project regarding the institutional and organizational innovations and corporate governance in China’s stock market.  相似文献   

16.
This paper explores roles that children play in ethnographic research. Based on the limited literature on children in the field, and drawing on examples from ethnographies across disciplines, I identify four roles for children: 1) as “wedges,” or as instrumentally important in helping adult ethnographers gain access in various ways; 2) as collaborators; 3) as objects of study; and 4) as subjects of study. I also discuss the ways in which these roles illuminate key methodological issues in ethnography, like reflexivity, ethics, and agency. The paper synthesizes and integrates previously disconnected research on the presence of children in the field with ethnographies in which children and childhood are the topics of research. I draw on my own fieldwork experiences for further illustration.
Hilary LeveyEmail:

Hilary Levey   is a PhD candidate in sociology at Princeton University. Her research interests include childhood, culture, gender, and qualitative methods, and her dissertation is an ethnography of competitive children’s activities, with a focus on elementary school-age children’s participation in chess, dance, and soccer. She has previously studied child beauty pageants and Kumon Math and Reading Centers.  相似文献   

17.
Zelizer’s work may be read as an attack on the central Polanyian thesis: that the market system threatens social life by the undue prominence it lends the economy in the organization of modern society. The recent publication of Viviana Zelizer’s The Purchase of Intimacy (2005a) is therefore an excellent opportunity to review the general trend of her work Zelizer 1979, 1985, 1994, and contrast her leading ideas to the central thesis that gives Polanyi’s work its particular flavor: the danger encapsulated in the use of modern money and the functioning of the market system. A draft of this essay was presented in March 2007 at a workshop held at the University of London, and a preliminary French version has appeared in a special issue of the Revue du Mauss devoted to Polanyi’s thought (Vol. 29, June 2007). The present version is directed to Zelizer’s views on the relation between market and society. I thank Franck Cochoy, Keith Hart, José Ossandon, and Viviana Zelizer for their helpful comments and advices.
Philippe SteinerEmail:

Philippe Steiner   is Professor of Sociology at Paris-Sorbonne University. He is the author of several books in the field of economic sociology: La sociologie économique 1890-1920 (Paris: Presses universitaires de France co-authored with J-J. Gislain), Sociologie de la connaissance économique. Essai sur les rationalisations de la connaissance économique (1750-1850) (Paris: Presses universitaires de France), and L’école durkheimienne et l’économie. Sociologie, religion et connaissance (Genève: Droz). His current field work is about the economic sociology of organ transplants (La transplantation d’organes: un commerce entre les êtres humains, forthcoming).  相似文献   

18.
How to model an institution   总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2  
Institutions are linkage mechanisms that bridge across three kinds of social divides—they link micro systems of social interaction to meso (and macro) levels of organization, they connect the symbolic with the material, and the agentic with the structural. Two key analytic principles are identified for empirical research, relationality and duality. These are linked to new research strategies for the study of institutions that draw on network analytic techniques. Two hypotheses are suggested. (1) Institutional resilience is directly correlated to the overall degree of structural linkages that bridge across domains of level, meaning, and agency. (2) Institutional change is related to over-bridging, defined as the sustained juxtaposition of multiple styles within the same institutional site. Case examples are used to test these contentions. Institutional stability is examined in the case of Indian caste systems and American academic science. Institutional change is explored in the case of the rise of the early Christian church and in the origins of rock and roll music.
John W. Mohr (Corresponding author)Email:
Harrison C. WhiteEmail:

John Mohr   is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at Yale University. He has a longstanding interest in using formal network methods to analyze cultural meaning systems. Along with Roger Friedland he is the organizer of the Cultural Turn Conference series at UCSB and the co-editor of Matters of Culture (Cambridge University Press 2004). He has published a number of articles on the formal analysis of meaning structures. His current research projects include a study of faculty change agents in higher education and the rise of nano-technology as a scientific project. Harrison White   is Giddings Professor of Sociology at Columbia University and most recently author of Identity and Control: How social formations emerge (2008) and Markets from Networks (2002), both from Princeton University Press. He is currently working on a variety of writings around sociology of meaning, including linguistics, with special focus around uncertainty and switchings. White has published numerous articles, both field studies and mathematical analyses of business firms and market operation. He is a founder of the joint doctoral program between sociology, psychology, and the business school at Harvard University and University of Arizona, and has served on the board of directors of an urban system consulting firm.  相似文献   

19.
Technology and institutions: living in a material world   总被引:1,自引:1,他引:0  
This article addresses the relationship between technology and institutions and asks whether technology itself is an institution. The argument is that social theorists need to attend better to materiality: the world of things and objects of which technical things form an important class. It criticizes the new institutionalism in sociology for its failure to sufficiently open up the black box of technology. Recent work in science and technology studies (S&TS) and in particular the sociology of technology is reviewed as another route into dealing with technology and materiality. The recent ideas in sociology of technology are exemplified with the author’s study of the development of the electronic music synthesizer.
Trevor PinchEmail:

Trevor Pinch   is professor of Sociology and professor of Science and Technology Studies at Cornell University. He holds degrees in physics and sociology. He has published fourteen books and numerous articles on aspects of the sociology of science and technology. His studies have included quantum physics, solar neutrinos, parapsychology, health economics, the bicycle, the car, and the electronic music synthesizer. His most recent books are How Users Matter (edited with Nelly Oudshoorn, MIT Press, 2003), Analog Days: The Invention and Impact of the Moog Synthesizer (with Frank Trocco, Harvard University Press, 2002) and Dr Golem: How To Think About Medicine (with Harry Collins, Chicago University Press, 2005). His latest book is Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Tehcnology Studies, (edited with Richard Swedberg, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (in press)) Analog Days was the winner of the 2003 silver award for popular culture “Book of the Year” of Foreword Magazine. The Golem: What You Should Know About Science (with Harry Collins, Cambridge: Canto 1998 2nd edition) was winner of the Robert Merton prize of the American Sociological Association. He is currently researching the online music community ACIDplanet.com.  相似文献   

20.
Although there is a growing international literature examining the relationship between sexual orientation and income or wages, there is far less evidence on whether sexual minorities experience systematically different non-pecuniary economic outcomes. I use confidential representative data on over 9,000 young Australian women age 22–27 with information on self-reported sexual orientation, income, and non-pecuniary economic outcomes such as: workplace harassment, job search difficulty, work stress, and job satisfaction. After controlling for demographic and work characteristics, I find that in comparison to heterosexual women the young lesbians in my sample: (1) have lower personal incomes; (2) have significantly higher odds of reporting distressing harassment at work, difficulty finding a job, losing a job, and decreased income; and (3) are significantly more dissatisfied with and report more stress about economic aspects of their lives (e.g. work, career, money). Differentials for non-economic aspects of life are generally smaller. These results for young lesbians in Australia suggest that lesbians are not a universally “privileged” minority and highlight the need for more research into lifecycle variations into both pecuniary and non-pecuniary aspects of economic well-being.
Christopher CarpenterEmail:
  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号