Outline, glossary, links, etc.
The most useful and most current outline is
from the outline form of the lectures.
The cover page of the PP lectures, including
the links, gives the link to each day’s lecture.
– You may also wish to print the concepts glossary
and the main sociologists for the exams.
– But learn the material as we go. You will not be able
to use those in the short answer questions, and you
will not get much credit for that information in essays
– When a link appears many times, it may only be
listed once.
However, the Villanova security system has
frustrated many students, and so on 9/24, I will
give anyone who wishes outlines of the first 10
Murray and Social Darwinism**
The position defended by Charles Murray
is similar to the position that dominated
sociology from 1840 to 1930
It was originated by Herbert Spencer**,
who was “Mr. Sociology” in that time,
The position called Social Darwinism.
Spencer defended the idea that progress
is driven by competition and “the survival
of the fittest.”
Social Darwinism in the age of
the robber barons
Spencerian sociology was very popular with
figures such as Carnagie
because he believed that policies such as
welfare and minimum wage promote the survival
of the less fit
and he thought poverty stemmed from the
nature of the poor.
The sociology of the Chicago school was
directed against Spencer’s views,
Which were discredited by the Great Depression
and the rise of the Nazi party.
Social Darwinism today
1.
2.
3.
4.
Murray does not defend the abolition of public
health, discrimination by racial groups or the
abolition of minimum wage in order to promote the
survival of the fittest. But he does defend them.
But he does believe, for example:
Genetic differences in ability determine one’s
chances of success.
Public policies are ineffective.
Discrimination has received a bad name; to
maintain a community’s norms requires
discriminating against those whose life style
conflicts with it.
Some portion of the difference in life chances of
minority groups is due to a genetic lack of ability.
The central flaw of Social
Darwinism:
Human beings are social animals.
It is as members of groups, communities,
families and other social groups that we do what
we do and are what we are.
The Chicago sociologists, Durkheim and Marx all
stressed this point.
The simple examples of crosstabulations from
the General Social Survey, e.g. networks (who
you know) and happiness (how you feel)
illustrate the pervasive mutually reinforcing
effects of conditions such as poverty.
Murray’s Analysis
Murray’s books have different starting
points, but they come to the same
conclusions: more coercion and less social
policy to reduce disadvantage.
Many sociologists argue that coercion
makes matters worse e.g. racial profiling*
Murray argues that social policy to reduce
disadvantage (e.g. AFDC, job training or
foodstamps) make matters worse.
Trendline Test
He argues that even in cases where
everyone says that gov’t policy has helped
Gov’t policy is, at best ineffective.
He argues that if you look at the data
carefully, it was the market (e.g. better
cars and roads) that drove down fatalities,
and 1974-87 slowed down the decrease.
Critically examine the argument.
Some specific Problems with
Murray’s analysis
1: What range of speed is involved: the lowered
speed limit was not designed to reduce fatalities,
and no one thought it would do so
2: What highways: the lower speed limits were
only on the interstates. Most fatalities are local.
Murray’s data is not confined to interstates.
3. Better cars, better highways, and inspections
(which Murray thinks lowered fatalities) are the
result of the kinds of policies he opposes.
A more general issue
Murray confines his analysis to 2 variables
with no feedbacks
– assuming that limits affect fatalities, but
fatalities cannot affect limits.
– This is analogous to a classic fallacy
– That fire engines do not decrease fire
damage.
– Looking at functional feedbacks avoids the
fallacy.
A possible “libertarian” theory of
government inefficiency
It is true that if a progressive and beneficial
process is operating, you do not want to “kill the
goose that lays the golden eggs.”
Libertarians (Murray, Spencer, 19th c. liberals)
believe that markets are that goose
gov’t policy interferes with them,
stunts individual initiative,
and is unfair.
Therefore they argue that go’t should concern
itself only with keeping order not HEW. Etc.
The fire engine fallacy
Suppose one were to decide on whether to have
a public fire company by seeing whether there
was greater or lesser damage when there were
more fire engines (or periods with more engines).
But when there are more fire engines, there is
more damage.
Fire engines do not cause damage, but they
respond to functional needs such as larger fires.
If policies are effective, but not totally effective,
they will be positively associated with problems.
The return to little house on the
prairie
Many of the proposals of Libertarians, like
Murray, are an attempt to go back to the
kind of social structure of the 19th c.
There was little government and lots of
mutual aid (e.g. bucket brigades for fires.)
But the San Francisco Earthquake and fire
storm shows the dysfunctionality of
relying on private fire companies or bucket
brigades in a modern city.