Sociology Hesitant: The Continuing Neglect of W.E.B. Du Bois

W.E.B. Du Bois’ early work as a sociologist from 1896 to 1914 represents a milestone in the development of modern sociology. His empirical studies often employed a triangular methodological approach, and by grounding The Philadelphia Negro in what is the earliest extensive social survey by an American sociologist, Du Bois set the stage for the growth of sociology as a legitimate science. In fact, his approach became the model that the discipline eventually followed. Had Du Bois been white, he would have been recognized as a leading founder of the field. Since Du Bois’ early sociological scholarship was completed during the height of the Jim Crow era, his brilliant landmark work was largely negated by the profession. His scholarly accomplishments clearly focused on establishing a scientific sociology. Based on his exemplary work, can sociology finally negate the sociological negation of W.E.B. Du Bois?     

Du Bois and the Sociology of Religion: Rediscovering a Founding Figure*

In his popular introductory sociology text, Stark identifies W. E. B. Du Bois and Albion Small as important cornerstones of the U.S. sociological tradition. While the work of the “Chicago School” is well known in sociological circles, Du Bois’ sociological legacy is not. The Philadelphia Negro ([1899] 1996) is a classic empirical sociological study that is rarely included in discussions of the development of scientific sociology. Likewise, The Negro Church ([1903b] 2003) represents one of the first empirically based sociological studies of a religious institution. Sociologists of religion routinely discuss the contributions of Durkheim, Weber, and Simmel while virtually ignoring Du Bois. This is ironic because Du Bois’ work on religion was based on ethnographic data, field interviews, surveys, and census data. This article provides an overview of Du Bois’ sociological study of the Black Church in the United States by identifying some of the main themes developed in The Philadelphia Negro ([1899] 1996), The Souls of Black Folk ([1903a] 1994), and The Negro Church ([1903b] 2003). These studies reveal that Du Bois was a pioneer in the areas of evaluation research, public sociology, service learning, and congregational studies.     

W. E. B. Du Bois as Interactionist: Reflections on the Canonical Incorporation of a Marginalized Scholar

Recent scholarship explores the relevance and canonical status of W. E. B. Du Bois in sociological theory; yet less is said about his contributions to symbolic interactionism. This paper interrogates the emerging meaning of W. E. B. Du Bois for sociology, and the nature of his canonical incorporation. We explore the less “official” dimensions of Du Boisian theory, and in particular two of his contributions to symbolic interactionism: double consciousness and autoethnography. In the last part of the paper, we suggest that Du Bois's incorporation into the sociological canon can be viewed as a process of “centering,” and argue that this form of sponsoring of Du Bois's work can elevate some interpretations of Du Bois to the detriment of others.     

Toward a DuBoisian theorization of school curricula

After a near century of mainstream academic exclusion, recent efforts in sociology have centered Du Bois as a foundational figure. However, these efforts have overlooked his contributions to theorizing K-12 and college/university formal curricula. Moreover, curricula, teaching, and learning scholarship, already marginalized within mainstream sociology of education, have typically overlooked Du Bois’ theorizations, thus reproducing his marginalization. As a correction, this article centers Du Bois as a key figure in critical curricula theory. Specifically, Du Bois theorized that schools institutionalize formal curricula imbued with race-class ideologies and that said ideologies shape peoples’ subjectivities, identities, and consciousness of social processes. However, Du Bois also theorized how Black schools can serve as meso-level sites for challenging hegemonic ideologies and producing transformative ideologies. In articulating these processes, Du Bois identifies how ideological propaganda, organizational structures, and interpretations of temporal processes maintain and perpetuate racism and capitalism. This article concludes with suggestions for future research in educational sociology that incorporates these insights.     

A CLASSIC FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE VEIL: Du Bois's Souls of Black Folk

Why has W.E.B. Du Bois not mattered more in sociology? In addition to being on the short list of the 20th century's most influential public intellectuals, Du Bois made substantial, if under recognized, intellectual contributions as a sociologist and social theorist. Among his nearly 2000 published writings, The Philadelphia Negro and Souls of Black Folk have all the qualities of classic works. Yet, neither has been officially canonized by sociology. The exclusion of Du Bois can be explained with tolerable plausibility by reference to his two key concepts in Souls of Black Folk: the veil and the double-self. One can only wonder what might have been significantly different about sociology, especially its theories of the Self and of field studies of race, had William James's most important student been allowed to matter.     

“With Whom no White Scholar can Compare”: Academic Interpretations of the Relationship between W.E.B. Du Bois and Max Weber

Max Weber (1864–1920) is considered one of the canonical founders of sociology, while W. E. B. Du Bois (1868–1963), author of The Philadelphia Negro (1899), The Souls of Black Folk (1903), and Black Reconstruction (1935), has only recently been included in the sociological canon. We provide a historical review of what we know of their relationship in order to first ask, what did Du Bois say about Weber, and second, what did Weber say about Du Bois? We then analyze the extant scholarly discourse of published English-language academic journal articles that substantively mention both Weber and Du Bois in order to address a third question: what did other scholars say about their relationship? We provide an analysis of the variation of scholars’ perceptions on the relationship between Du Bois and Weber to illumine the dominant assumptions about founding figures and the origin story of American sociology writ large. We argue that three mechanisms of white group interests configured the marginalization of Du Bois from both mainstream and sub-disciplinary sociological theory: (1) reduction or “knowing that we do no know and not caring to know” (when knowledge is perceived as irrelevant to white group interests), (2) deportation or “not wanting to know” (when knowledge is systematically exiled), and (3) appropriation or “not knowing that we do not know”) (when dominant knowledge usurps or assimilates challenges to that knowledge).     

W.E.B. Du Bois and the women of hull-house, 1895–1899

An important aspect of W.E.B. Du Bois’s professional socialization is documented; specifically, Du Bois’s professional interactions with women sociologists who practiced in social settlements, notably Jane Addams, Katherine Bement Davis, Florence Kelley, and Isabel Eaton. These women, and their research in Hull-House Maps and Papers, were facilitators and role models for Du Bois’s The Philadelphia Negro, in which Isabel Eaton was a significant collaborator. Addams, Kelley, and their friends joined Du Bois to cofound the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, an exemplar of applied sociology and Du Bois’s shared interests with the early Hull-House women. These early sociologists changed American thought and social policy and today provide a rich heritage for contemporary professionals in sociology.     

W.E.B. DU BOIS,THE BLACK CHURCH,AND THE SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF RELIGION

During his early sociological period (1896–1914), Du Bois published several empirically-based studies on the Black Church. Many topics were addressed that are relevant to the contemporary study of the Black Church and the sociology of religion. Du Bois utilized methodological triangulation to empirically ground his studies of the Black Church. Census, survey, and ethnographic data were integrated to provide a comprehensive picture of the role of the Black Church in the African American community. He addressed the social construction of African American religious identity and provided an early functional analysis of the Black Church. The association between religion and social class was recognized, and Du Bois was a pioneer in the area of congregational studies addressing such issues as church expenditures and membership patterns and generating surveys of children's religious beliefs and ministerial effectiveness. Extensive data were collected on Black Church membership in large cities and small communities. These data make it possible to reconstruct the Black Church religious economy in these areas. Du Bois' sociological work on religion provides a link to the discipline's past and a bridge to its future.     

W. E. B. Du Bois at the center: from science,civil rights movement,to Black Lives Matter

I am honoured to present the 2016 British Journal of Sociology Annual Lecture at the London School of Economics. My lecture is based on ideas derived from my new book, The Scholar Denied: W.E.B. Du Bois and the Birth of Modern Sociology. In this essay I make three arguments. First, W.E.B. Du Bois and his Atlanta School of Sociology pioneered scientific sociology in the United States. Second, Du Bois pioneered a public sociology that creatively combined sociology and activism. Finally, Du Bois pioneered a politically engaged social science relevant for contemporary political struggles including the contemporary Black Lives Matter movement.     

Black Interactionist Thought and the Lived-Experience Approach to Symbolic Interactionism

Du Bois is often regarded as an important scholar for his contributions to the development of sociology. However, less is known about his work in developing interactionist thought. This essay is an introduction to this special issue, and a small attempt to acknowledge the work of scholars of color within the interactionist tradition. The Du Bosian approach to sociology has for too long been dismissed out of hand. Scholars pursuing new areas of inquiry, topics outside the bounds of “mainstream sociology,” are often met with fierce resistance—even today. Instead of building these scholars up, through mentorship and aid, so-called “accomplished” scholars see fit to tear down the work of those not like them. The Du Bosian perspective celebrates the plurality of voices, advocates for mentorship, and sees sociological inquiry as rooted in the real needs and concerns of those so marginalized. As this collection of articles illustrates, even when conforming to scientific standards work in this tradition has a political dimension as it lays bare the inequities in society—even, at times, drawing government interference with their work. This issue also calls upon professional sociologists to reflect on the ways they reproduce these patterns within the discipline and higher education.     

Art as Propaganda: Bringing Du Bois into the Sociology of Art

We examine WEB Du Bois's writings about the arts in the NAACP journal The Crisis from 1910–1934 in order to construct a Du Boisian social theory of the arts. The key elements of this theoretical framework are: artists, money, freedom, organization, truth, beauty, and propaganda. The most surprising element is propaganda, which for Du Bois meant that art needs to address racial politics. There is a strong sense in Du Bois's writings that art can and should have socially transformative effects. Comparing Du Bois's work to current theories from the sociology of art, we find that Du Bois emphasizes the role of art in social change, while current work treats art primarily as a tool for social reproduction. We argue for expanding the theoretical toolbox of the sociology of the arts through greater consideration of Du Bois's propaganda concept.     

Bourdieu's distinction between philosophical and sociological approaches to Science Studies*

Sociological inquiry into the natural sciences has shown that they are contingent, social constructions. However, Science Studies research has been obstructed by epistemological conflicts about the nature of science and theoretical perspectives upon studying it. Bourdieu's sociology of science is under‐utilized in this field, as he addresses these obstructions and offers a way forward. Bourdieu argues that researchers have failed to distinguish between sociological and philosophical approaches in social science, thus committing the ‘scholastic fallacy’. In conjunction with this fallacy, the logic of the Science Studies field produces a tendency towards disciplinary confusion, philosophical radicalization, and crisis. These patterns were expressed in the ‘science wars’. The field has followed a philosophical path rather than a sociological one, and its progress has been obstructed. While some of Bourdieu's philosophical arguments remain problematic, his reflexive sociology allows us to differentiate philosophical from sociological approaches, providing an alternative direction for Science Studies.     

Sociological Knowledge of the Other: Wolff’s “Surrender and Catch” Methodology

From a sociological perspective the “surrender and catch” expression derives, of course, from the experiential and existential basis of Wolff’s epistemology and hermeneutics.“Surrender” is connected with phenomenology, and Husserl’s (as well as Schütz’s) writings, besides Scheler’s idea of a “relatively natural world view”.“Surrender and catch” is also a “sociology of understanding” a definition which recuperates the German verstehende Soziologie though it makes a distinction between “surrender” and “surrender to”. It is not just a theory, it is a methodology too, in order to understand the otherness.Wolff was a multi-facetted scholar and this affected his conceptualizations. Furthermore, his surrender is something one experiences existentially in a number of fields, from the nature of empirical research to the art of theoretical reflection, from politics to poetry, from philosophy to history to sociology.It must also be pointed out that surrender and catch are a form of protest against the status quo.     

Pierre Bourdieu: theorizing the digital

ABSTRACT

Pierre Bourdieu is known for his research in the areas of education and cultural stratification that led to a number of theoretical contributions informing the social sciences. Bourdieu’s interrelated concepts of field, capital, and habitus have become central in many approaches to inequality and stratification across the social sciences. In addition, we argue that Bourdieu’s ideas also feature in what is increasingly known as ‘digital sociology.’ To underscore this claim, we explore the ways in which Bourdieu’s ideas continue to have a major impact on social science research both on and with digital and Internet-based technologies. To do so, we offer a review of both Bourdieusian theorizing of the digital vis-à-vis both research on the social impacts of digital communication technologies and the application of digital technologies to social science research methods. We contend that three interconnected features of Bourdieu’s sociology have allowed his approach to flourish in the digital age: (1) his theories’ inseparability from the practice of empirical research; (2) his ontological stance combining realism and social constructionism; and (3) his familiarity with concepts developed in other disciplines and participation in interdisciplinary collaborative projects. We not only reason that these three factors go some way in accounting for Bourdieu’s influence in many sociological subfields, but we also suggest that they have been especially successful in positioning Bourdieusian sociology to take advantage of opportunities associated with digital communication technologies.     

Tamito Yoshida: An Unknown Master of Japanese Sociology

This paper outlines the life and academic accomplishments of the largely internationally unknown but foremost innovative and leading sociologist of Japan considered as the “unknown master” of Japanese sociology, Tamito Yoshida. (i) Emphasizing originality and creativity, Yoshida's success was free from the existing sociological frameworks and he liberated theoretical study from the yoke of historical perspectives that had long governed Japanese theoretical sociology. (ii) Yoshida's uniform scientific approach that used the keywords of information, selection, and variation based on evolutionist ideas was consistent throughout his life from proposing the “design of information science” in his mid‐thirties to proposing the concept of “program sciences” in his later years. (iii) One of Yoshida's major sociological contributions was in identifying the close relationship between subjectivity and the structure of possession. (iv) Yoshida's “A Historical Perspective on the Forces and Relations of Production” is an original and critical re‐creation of the Marxist possession theory located within his own theoretical framework, and is an excellent critique of the central arguments of Marxism. It successfully illustrates Yoshida's superlative critical and creative skills of theoretical dialogue.     

Alfred Schütz — Ökonom und/oder Soziologe?

In 1996, Hartmut Esser published a rational choice model of the “Definition of the Situation” in this journal (KZfSS 48, 1996: 1–34). This work is based on his economic interpretation of the theory of Alfred Schutz, a co-founder of interpretative sociology. This paper analyses Hartmut Esser’s attempt to reconstruct the sociological concept of the definition of the situation by means of economic theory. It shows that Esser’s misinterpretations and abridgements of the theory of Alfred Schutz (this is especially true of the interactive aspects) lead to considerable discrepancies between Esser and Schutz in modelling the definition of the situation. In his economic modelling of the definition of the situation Esser fails to conceive the sociological essence of this concept (the construction of sense structures) because he formulates a model of rational behavior in accordance with the economic tradition. Schutz, however, advocates the construction of rational models of human behavior, which also includes “irrational” (not utility-maximizing) or “sense”-directed behavior.     

Franz Oppenheimer (1926), Die soziologische Staatsidee. (Die Eroberung) [The Sociological Idea of the State (The Conquest)]

F. Oppenheimer's System der Soziologie is a multivolume publication that contains a general sociology as a common basis for all social sciences; a theory of development; as well as specialized sociologies: sociology of the economy, of law, of the state, etc. Oppenheimer conceived sociology as a historically grounded universal science. Ibn Khaldun came into play in relationship with Oppenheimer's state theory. His approach directly built on Gumplowicz's “sociological state theory”. An overview on Oppenheimer's works shows that Ibn Khaldun was by no means the starting point of theorization on the state. We do not find any reference to him in an earlier publication, Der Staat (1912), that already contained the full elaboration of Oppenheimer's theory. Nevertheless, his reception of Ibn Khaldun is important: Ibn Khaldun was mobilized within the framework of a scholarly debate that was ongoing amongst European sociologists at the time, and whose key representative, Ludwig Gumplowicz, contributed significantly to his reception in the concerned period. In this context, Oppenheimer did not merely mention Ibn Khaldun in an encyclopaedic endeavor to present a complete overview on “precursors” of sociology, but as a representative and contributor to a theoretical approach which, Oppenheimer believed, they both shared.     

Social Theory and the De/Reconstruction of Agricultural Science: Local Knowledge for an Alternative Agriculture1

Abstract As a result of environmental and agrarian activism and of academic critique, a substantial amount of space is available now for moving agricultural technoscience onto new trajectories. A critical rural sociology has played a key role in pushing forward the deconstructive project that has been instrumental in creating this space. And rural sociologists can be active agents in the reconstruction of the alternative science that must emerge from “actually existing” science and that must be developed if there is to be a truly alternative agriculture. But to be effective in this effort we need to enlarge not only the canon of our colleagues in the natural sciences, but our own canon as well. This article suggests that the theoretical resources for such reconstruction are available in contemporary sociological and feminist interpretations of science. Material resources for the reconstruction of a “successor science” are to be found in the “local knowledge” that is continually produced and reproduced by farmers and agricultural workers. Articulations and complementarities between theoretical resources are suggested and potentially productive research areas are outlined.     

Reply to Klein

Many “theoretical” writings in sociology and in the social sciences use conceptual frameworks (perspectives, paradigms). Developments in family sociology are used as a case study to explore the role of conceptual frameworks in the growth of scientific theory. The claim that conceptual frameworks are necessary for theory building is evaluated. Using writings in family sociology and in the philosophy of science, the claim is found wanting. Social scientists are therefore cautioned to avoid conceptual work that is only rhetorically related to the development of theory.