Postmodernism and Sociology: From the Epistemological to the Empirical

This article investigates the place of postmodernism in sociology today by making a distinction between its epistemological and empirical forms. During the 1980s and early 1990s, sociologists exposited, appropriated, and normalized an epistemological postmodernism that thematizes the tentative, reflective, and possibly shifting nature of knowledge. More recently, however, sociologists have recognized the potential of a postmodern theory that turns its attention to empirical concerns. Empirical postmodernists challenge classical modern concepts to develop research programs based on new concepts like time-space reorganization, risk society, consumer capitalism, and postmodern ethics. But they do so with an appreciation for the uncertainty of the social world, ourselves, our concepts, and our commitment to our concepts that results from the encounter with postmodern epistemology. Ultimately, this article suggests that understanding postmodernism as a combination of these two moments can lead to a sociology whose epistemological modesty and empirical sensitivity encourage a deeper and broader approach to the contemporary social world.     

The Pinochet case: cosmopolitanism and intermestic human rights

This article explores the Pinochet case, widely heralded as a landmark, as a case of 'intermestic' human rights that raises difficult normative and empirical questions concerning cosmopolitan justice. The article is a contribution to the sociology of human rights from the perspective of methodological cosmopolitanism, developing conceptual tools and methods to study how cosmopolitanizing state institutions and cultural norms are inter-related. The argument is made that in order to understand issues of cosmopolitan justice, sociologists must give more consideration to political culture.     

HERBERT BLUMER'S CONCEPTUAL IMPACT

Blumer's conceptual development was particularly crucial to the development of sociology. Despite his many talents, Blumer's importance as a sociologist stems from his profound theoretical contributions. He affected the discipline through his insistence on precision of thought in a field that let fuzzy ideas and meaningless numbers take its place. In addition, he offered a serious axiomatic-deductive theory to sociology. Although we do not always recognize his impact, few sociologists are untouched by his work. Ultimately Blumer's impact is what we make it by our own practice.     

Applied sociology? Even musicians give concerts

Applied sociology is basically what sociologists do for nonsociologists and sometimes for themselves. Applied sociology includes the teaching of sociology as one of the liberating arts and sciences. It also involves the practice of sociology outside academia in the public and private sectors. Either way, applied sociology needs support groups, and state sociological associations need useful things to do beyond their traditional interests in academic teaching and research. Professional sociological associations, and especially those that serve at the local, state level, can become important support groups for applied sociology. This article suggests five types of applied sociology projects appropriate for state associations. These are volunteering applied sociology; doing applied sociology through consulting; making the value of sociological applications more visible; identifying applied sociology jobs for our baccalaureate, master's, and doctoral graduates; and helping to improve the socioeconomic outlook for our academic colleagues and, in turn, ourselves. State associations provide an organizational base, proximate members, and local opportunities for applying sociology. Ron Wimberley, teaches sociological research methods and does research on the southern Black Belt and other topics. He also attempts applied sociology through volunteer work, consulting, and occasional leaves from his university position. Catherine Harris of Wake Forest University is appreciated for suggesting the topic. The author is responsible for the views expressed in the article.     

No Path to Paradise: Deconstructing the Promise of Public Sociology

This essay treats Burawoy’s advocacy for public sociology as a social problems claim. Using a social constructionist approach, I examine the rhetorical strategies Burawoy uses to construct the discipline in a way that makes public sociology seem not only relevant, but integral to what sociologists do. Sociology’s history, ethos and practitioners are framed in ways that make its commitment to the civil sphere appear as a “natural” direction for the discipline. Certain features of the discipline are foregrounded. Motives and desires are imputed. Villains are constructed and the paths to progress are outlined. By examining the framing strategies Burawoy uses to present his vision, the promise of public sociology is called into question. I do not argue that public sociology is without value. Rather, I unpack the claims its advocates make and question whether public sociology can deliver on its promise of a better sociology or a better society.     

Pour une approche sociologique de la comptabilité Réflexions à partir de la réforme comptable chinoise

Based on research on state-run companies in China, the reform of Chinese accountancy is examined so as to show the advantages of a sociological approach to accounting. How can bookkeeping interest sociologists? First of all, it has come out of struggles between various parties and addresses social issues. Secondly, it conveys models of reality, in particular of what is and is not a firm. Thirdly, it produces history in that it shapes economic practices and expectations. Finally, there is a high degree of coherence between the bookkeeping system, the form of a firm, the operation of the economy and the management of social questions. These various points turn accountancy into a legitimate subject of study for sociology and provide an interesting approach to analyzing broader phenomena and processes.     

PRESIDENTIAL SPEECHES AND TEACHING SOCIOLOGY (2009 MSSA PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS)

In this address, I review available published presidential addresses written by presidents of various sociological organizations as a way of thinking about sociology and what sociologists may find important. Using Eller's categorizations, I divide the articles into three types including (1) query of the profession in which the author discussed the history of sociology or its future; (2) a call for new directions in methodologies or theories within sociology; and (3) a focus on the author/president's research. Then, I focus on what is missing in most presidential addresses given by sociologists: sociologists' role as educators and the impact we have upon students. I find that most presidential addresses do not include any or only passing nods to our responsibilities as teachers. I end the address with a call to consider our responsibilities and impact as teachers.     

Going Public: Networking Globally and Locally*

Abstract Rural sociologists figure prominently in the move towards public sociology. The paper takes up Michael Burawoy's call for public sociology and discusses what rural sociologists have to offer to publics and how we stand to gain as a discipline in working with publics. The paper argues that rural sociologists' ability to adopt a cosmopolitan view while negotiating the complexities of global/local processes provides a useful theoretical stance for doing public sociology. Methodologically, both feminist methods and various approaches to networks can guide us as we do public sociology. Then, the paper provides two examples of recent efforts to do public sociology with a women's community group in Sri Lanka in response to the tsunami and with the Pennsylvania Women's Agricultural Network to illustrate the possibilities and limitations of working with networks. In conclusion, the paper addresses opportunities for doing public sociology, the challenges we face as we go public, and future work that is needed to develop theoretically and methodologically strong public rural sociology.     

Atoms for Peace,Atoms for War: Probing the Paradoxes of Modernity*

Macrostructural analyses have long dominated the field of social theories of modernity, with the work of Habermas, Giddens, and Beck providing influential cases in point. Empirical studies, however, have raised questions about the applicability and empirical soundness of macrostructural approaches to risks, technology, and nature, and U.S.‐based sociologists have offered alternative theories that have been identified in some studies as providing better predictions and explanations than the macrostructural analyses. Informed by all of the above theories, this article examines the “Atoms for Peace” program, which established the civilian uses of nuclear energy, providing one of the central scientific and technological achievements of modernity. Given the mixed results of nuclear technology development, the mid‐range, structurally informed perspectives of Short and other U.S.‐based sociologists do appear to provide the best interpretations, both for the “Atoms for Peace” program and for the broader legacy of the technological and environmental risks of modernity.     

A Sociology of the Periphery Versus a Peripheral Sociology: Rural Sociology and the Dimension of Space1

Abstract Rural sociology is intrinsically concerned with the spatial dimensions of social life. However, this underlying research tradition, particularly the use of space as a research strategy, has been insufficiently addressed and its contributions to general sociology are little recognized. I outline how concern with space, uneven development, and the social relationships of peripheral settings have provided substantive boundary and conceptual meaning to rural sociology, propelled its evolution, and left it with a legacy of strengths, weaknesses, and challenges. A willingness to tackle the dimension of space and the thorny problems it raises often sets rural sociologists apart from other sociologists. This research tradition contrasted with general sociology's concern with developing generalization, aspatial covering laws, and proto-typical relationships of modern or Fordist development settings. Conceptual openings have left sociologists questioning their past agenda. Coupled with the “creative marginality” inherent in the questions and contexts addressed by rural sociologists, this makes the subfield central to contemporary sociology.     

A Sociology of the Unmarked: Redirecting Our Focus

This article suggests that American sociology has developed a de facto tradition in the sociology of the marked that devotes greater epistemological attention to "politically salient" and "ontologically uncommon" features of social life. Although the "unmarked" comprises the vast majority of social life, the "marked" commands a disproportionate share of attention from sociologists. Since the marked already draws more attention within the general culture, social scientists contribute to re-marking and the reproduction of common-sense images of social reality. This has important analytic consequences. This article argues for developing a stronger tradition in a sociology of the unmarked that explicitly foregrounds "politically unnoticed" and taken-for-granted elements of social reality. Three strategies are proposed toward this end: (1) reversing conventional patterns of markedness to foreground what typically remains unnamed and implicit, (2) marking everything by filling in all the shades of social continua so that each shares the same degree of epistemological ornamentation, and (3) developing an analytically nomadic perspective that observes social phenomena from multiple vantage points.     

Theoretical stances and environmental debates: Reconciling the physical and the symbolic

Several sociologists arc currently debating the relationship of sociology to the physical environment. Their debates beg a question of more general importance to sociology: How do we organize our thinking about phenomena that are at once physical or material and symbolic or ideal? Our intention is not to add another voice in favor of or opposed to theorizing material, physical, or organic characteristics, but to examine the process of thinking about environments and more generally the realist-idealist divide. Environment (like the body) is unlike typical social science concepts in so far as it is both physical and social. If, for example, status and role are purely social concepts, environment is always more than social. I low do sociologists approach what is always more than social in the study of physical environments? Theorizing environments, we propose, is fashioned by the analytic stance of the investigator as legislative, interpretive, or symbolic realist. The strengths and weaknesses of these stances are discussed, and throughout our discussion empirical work representing each ol them is introduced. A final inquiry examines how sociologists can approach these three stances. Two strategies are identified: to assume each stance mirrors the environment as it actually exists or assume the stances are terminologies for exploring various combinations of the physical-symbolic properties ol environments. A brief plea is made for the second strategy.     

Realms,subfields, and perspectives: On the differentiation and fragmentation of sociology

This article proposes a heuristic classification of intradisciplinary structure and applies that scheme to the current debate over the relationship between the proliferation of subfields and disciplinary fragmentation in sociology. It is argued here that the fragmentation of sociology is caused by the multiplication of competing perspectives rather than by the differentiation of fields of specialization. While competition among perspectives reflects disagreements among sociologists on what their subject matter should be and how to approach it, the proliferation of subfields is generally a result of disciplinary progress.     

Sur le langage et l’écriture en sociologie Brèves considérations théoriques et pratiques à partir de Bourdieu

After showing that language and writing are used as basic resources in sociology, this article seeks to identify issues raised by writing in sociology to produce the knowledge expected of this discipline as other social sciences. After considering the status of sociological knowledge and use of language that this knowledge requires, the article seeks to define the rules to be followed by sociologists in order to explain what it means in science. The arguments presented here differ from those developed in some post-modern theories, according to which sociology is after all only a matter of language, and sociologists are authors like novelists. The article is based on considerations developed in particular by Pierre Bourdieu.     

How Role Replaced Personality as a Major Category of Sociology

Try to imagine sociology being without the role concept. The thought experiment will strike us as impossible. And yet, through the early decades of the 20th century, remarkably few sociologists thought of social agents as incumbents of social roles and as performing roles in their day to day lives. This article addresses a set of related questions. How did sociologists manage without the concept social role? How did they describe the social agent and his agency? When and in what circumstances was the term social role initially formulated and when did it enter the vocabulary of social science? Ralph Linton’s The Study of Man (1936) is identified as the key text in this history of the concept social role, foreshadowed in writings of Robert Park, E. A. Burgess, and Kimball Young. Linton introduced his role idea in the midst of disciplinary change with boundaries between sociology and psychology (particularly social, and personal, psychology) being redrawn.     

Integrating Poverty and Environmental Concerns into Value‐Chain Analysis: A Strategic Framework and Practical Guide

This article aims to guide the design and implementation of action‐research projects in value‐chain analysis by presenting a strategic framework focused on small producers and trading and processing firms in developing countries. Its stepwise approach – building on the conceptual framework set out in a companion article – covers in detail what to do, questions to be asked and issues to be considered, and integrates poverty, gender, labour and environmental concerns.‘Upgrading’ strategies potentially available for improving value‐chain participation for small producers are identified, with the ultimate purpose of increasing the rewards and/or reducing the risks.     

Standardizing basic concepts in sociology

The idea of standardizing concepts in sociology is not new, but we have made little progress, despite the early hopes of such theorists as Durkheim and Weber. This article refutes the arguments of some who contend that we do not need standard concepts, we cannot make standard concepts, social phenomena are too complex and changeful, sociologists are too individualistic and sociological concepts are too context-dependent. The author proposes that the American Sociological Association appoint a Committee on Basic Sociological Concepts to investigate and recommend the official adoption of a basic conceptual language in American sociology. This paper is excerpted from a longer discussion first presented to a session on metatheory at the 1990 meetings of the American Sociological Association, and forthcoming in a collection of papers from that session.     

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.     

Reexamining economic sociology: Beyond rational choice reductionism

The article aims at reexamining the origins and character of economic sociology by comparison with rational choice within the history of economic and social ideas, particularly neoclassical economic and classical sociological theory. Some suggestions for a rational choice approach to economic sociology are particularly curious in that they tend to conflate the distinct characters and origins of these two disciplines throughout this history and have in turn provided an impetus for this reexamination. Modern rational choice theorists display a predilection for reducing economic (and, all) sociology into an economic approach to human behavior, with many economic sociologists evincing some degree of lenience or benevolence vis-à-vis such tendencies. Both tendencies do not seem justified in light of the different nature and origin of economic sociology and rational choice in the history of social and economic ideas. Since the current literature lacks coherent attempts at specifying the nature and historical roots of economic sociology versus those of rational choice, the article contributes toward filling in this hole.