IS ACADEMIC
SOCIOLOGY
FLOURISHING
OR IS IT BEING
OVERTAKEN BY
THINK TANKS AND
BY ECONOMISTS?
WOUT ULTEE
HAIFA OCTOBER 20, 2012
FIRST MEETING OF THE PHD
COURSE
PARADIGMS AND PROBLEM
SHIFTS IN SOCIOLOGY
YOU ALL ARE NOW WORKING ON YOUR PH.D.
I DEFENDED MY THESIS IN 1977,
STARTED WORKING ON IT IN 1970
AND
IT WAS NOT A THESIS IN SOCIOLOGY,
BUT ABOUT SOCIOLOGY
ITS TITLE WAS
GROWTH OF KNOWLEDGE –
AND STAGNATION IN SOCIOLOGY
IT WAS DEFENDED IN DUTCH AND
IN 1981 A GERMAN TRANSLATION APPEARED
IN 1970 SOCIOLOGY SUPPOSEDLY WAS IN CRISIS
AND I THOUGHT SO TOO - IN 1970
IN MY PH.D. I DEVELOPED CRITERIA FOR PROGRESS IN AN
ACADEMIC FIELD
I TOOK THEM FROM KARL POPPER’S CRITICAL
RATIONALISM,
THEN CRITICAL RATIONALISM WAS THE MAIN CURRENT IN
THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE,
CRITICAL RATIONALISM WAS NOT LEADING IN THE
PHILOSOPHY IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
THE CRITERIA FOR PROGRESS NOT ONLY APPLIED TO
DOING RESEARCH,
BUT ALSO TO THEORY BUILDING
AND TO PROBLEM CHOICE
WHEN APPYING THESE CRITERIA TO DEVELOPMENTS IN
FIVE SOCIOLOGICAL TRADITIONS,
I WAS IN FOR A FEW SURPRISES
MOST PROGRESS HAD BEEN MADE IN THE TRADITION OF
EMPIRICAL SOCIAL RESEARCH FOUNDED BY LAZARSFELD,
A TRADITION SEEMINGLY WITHOUT A THEORY
LEAST PROGRESS HAD BEEN MADE IN AMERICAN
INTERPRETATIVE SOCIOLOGY (MEAD) – ITS THEORIES DID
NOT GET OFF THE GROUND
ALMOST UNIVERSALLY VILIFIED STRUCTURAL
FUNCTIONALISM
HAD MADE SIZEABLE PROGRESS WITH DURKHEIM’S
THEORY OF SUICIDE,
AND MERTON’S THEORIES OF (WHITE COLLAR) CRIME AND
PRIORITY DISPUTES AMONG SCIENTISTS
THE RESULTS ON MARXISM WERE VERY MIXED
LEAST PROGRESS HAD BEEN MADE IN ORTHODOX
HISTORICAL MATERIALISM (LUXEMBURG) – ITS
CHANGING THEORIES FACED EVER MORE
CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE
WHILE REVISIONIST HISTORICAL MATERIALISM
(BERNSTEIN, LENSKI) HAD MADE PROGRESS AS
REGARDS PROBLEMS, THEORIES AND RESEARCH
(ALTHOUGH ORTHODOX MATERIALISTS DISPARGED IT)
IN THOSE DAYS UTILITARIST INDIVIDUALISM (LATER
CALLED RATIONAL CHOICE) WAS ABOUT TO BREAK
THROUGH IN SOCIOLOGY, COMING FROM
PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL (ETHICAL) PHILOSOPHY, AND
ECONOMICS
IN MY 1977 OPINION, GIVEN DEVELOPMENTS IN
ECONOMICS, THIS WAS A PROMISING PROGRAMME
FOR FUTURE DECADES (I NOW DO NOT THINK SO THAT
MUCH ANYMORE)
CURRENT SOCIOLOGY
CONTAINS THREE BIG
DIVISIONS:
NUMBER CRUNCHING
VERSUS WORD
PROCESSING
NEWSPEAK VERSUS
TRIVIAL HYPOTHESES
EVER MORE EXOTIC
TOPICS VERSUS
REHASHED STUFF
I LIKE TO CRUNCH NUMBERS,
BUT I ALSO PROCESSED
WORDS
I GO FOR THEORIES FROM
WHICH A LOT OF CONCRETE
HYPOTHESES CAN BE DERIVED
AND I TAKE SOCIOLOGY AS
DEALING WITH THREE BIG
QUESTIONS, THREE
QUESTIONS COMPRISING A
LONG LIST OF SMALL SIMILAR
QUESTIONS
THE BIG MISTAKE OF CURRENT SOCIOLOGY IS
THAT IT IS UNCLEAR
THERE IS AN UNEASY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
MICROSOCIOLOGY AND MACROSOCIOLOGY
SOCIOLOGY IS NOT ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS
SOCIOLOGY’S QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT HUMAN
SOCIETIES
IF SOCIOLOGY IS ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS, ITS
BORDERS WITH PSYCHOLOGY DISAPPEAR
AND IF DISCIPLINARY BORDERS SHOULD
DISAPPEAR, IT IS BETWEEN SOCIOLOGY AND
(EVOLUTIONARY) BIOLOGY
THE WORD
MACROSOCIOLOGY
CONTAINS A
SUPERFLUIDITY:
SOCIOLOGY ALWAYS IS
MACROSOCIOLOGY
BUT MICROSOCIOLOGY MAY BE TURNED INTO
MACROSOCIOLOGY
THE FINDINGS OF EXPLANATORY STUDIES ON THE
STRENGTH OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
EDUCATION HUSBAND AND EDUCATION WIFE
IN THE NETHERLANDS, IN ISRAEL AND IN OTHER
INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES,
MAY BE COMPARED,
RAISING THE QUESTION OF WHY
THIS RELATIONSHIP IS STRONGER IN SOME COUNTRY
THAN IN OTHER COUNTRIES
THE LESSON:
THERE ARE QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES THAT
PERTAIN TO BOTH SOCIETIES AS WELL AS PERSONS
THESE
ARE A
FEW OF
MY
FAVORITE
THINGS
THE BIRTH-LEVEL OF DUTCH
ROMAN-CATHOLICS
A DEMOGRAPHIC-SOCIOLOGICAL
STUDY OF AN EMANCIPATED
MINORITY GROUP
MY FAVORITE
UNDERGRADUATE
BOOK
IT IS FROM 1954
AND I STUDIED IT IN
1965
I WAS NOT EXAMINED
ABOUT IT
MY FAVORITE GRADUATE BOOK I
READ IT IN 1968
THE PROFESSOR WHO EXAMINED
ME, DID NOT LIKE IT BECAUSE
DURKHEIM WAS SOCIOLOGISTIC,
DURKHEIM SUPPOSEDLY WAS
NOT PREPARED TO ADMIT THE
EFFECTS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL
FACTORS
I COMPLETELY DISAGREED
AND THE PROFESSOR DID NOT
UNDERSTAND THAT DURKHEIM
HAD A THEORY CONSISTING OF
LEVELS OF GENERALITY
1895
THE FIRST SUCH THEORY I
ENCOUNTERED
MY FAVORITE
SOCIOLOGY BOOK
EARLY ON IN THE
PERIOD I WORKED ON
MY PH.D.,
I PROBABLY READ IT IN
1971
THE BOOK IS FROM 1966
I NEVER HEARD ABOUT
IT FROM PROFESSORS
IT PRESENTS ANOTHER
THEORY CONSISTING OF
VARIOUS LEVELS OF
GENERALITY
MY FAVORITE
TEXTBOOK
LENSKI, HUMAN
SOCIETIES, FIRST
EDITION 1970
ELEVENTH EDITION
2009
I USED IT WHEN
TEACHING AROUND
1975
NOTE THE
SUPERFLUIDITY IN
THE TITLE
BUT IT IS A VERY
GOOD SYNTHESIS
THE CONTENTS MAKE
CLEAR THAT LENSKI
DISTINGUISHES TYPES OF
SOCIETIES
IN POWER AND PRIVILEGE, BETTER CALLED
RESOURCES AND ADVANTAGES
LENSKI LINKED THE LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY OF
A SOCIETY TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE
MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY DIFFER IN RESOURCES
AND ADVANTAGES
THE INDIVIDUAL PROPOSITION THAT THE
MEMBERS WITH MORE RESOURCES HAVE MORE
ADVANTAGES MAY BE TAKEN AS AN INDIVIDUAL
PROPOSITION, BUT IT IS A RATHER TRIVIAL ONE
MORE IMPORTANTLY, IN HUMAN SOCIETIES,
LENSKI LINKED A SOCIETY’S LEVEL OF
TECHNOLOGY TO OTHER SOCIETAL PHENOMENA
LIKE ITS COHESION AND ITS RELIGION
SO, HUMAN SOCIETIES EXPANDS UPON POWER
AND PRIVILEGE
CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGISTS LIKE GOLDTHORPE SAY
THAT SOCIOLOGY CANNOT DO WITHOUT A THEORY OF
(INDIVIDUAL) ACTION
THAT MAY BE TRUE, BUT WHERE IS SOCIOLOGY’S THEORY
OF SOCIETIES?
LENSKI HAS ONE:
THE HIGHER A SOCIETY’S LEVEL OF SUBSISTENCE
TECHNOLOGY, THE MORE STRATIFIED IT IS
WITH EGALITARIAN IDEOLOGIES OFFSETTING THE
CONSEQUENCES OF SUBSISTENCE TECHNOLOGY IN
INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES
INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY MAKES FOR MORE
EGALITARIAN IDEOLOGIES, BUT DOES NOT COMPLETELY
DETERMINE IDEOLOGY
WHAT DO I
PARTICULARLY LIKE IN
THE BOOKS THAT I
LIKE?
AS A NUMBER
CRUNCHER I LIKE
TABLES AND
GRAPHS
ALSO FROM LENSKI, HUMAN SOCIETIES
THE PROBLEM FOR THE SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION IS
NOT WHY THERE IS SOME RELIGION IN EVERY
SOCIETY (AS STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALISM
MAINTAINS),
BUT WHY THERE IS SO MUCH RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY
A GRAPH FROM INGLEHART,
CULTURE SHIFT IN ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL
SOCIETIES
FROM 1990
SOCIETIES DO NOT SO MUCH CHANGE
BECAUSE EVERY INHABITANT SHIFTS
FROM ONE OPINION TO ANOTHER
ALTHOUGH INDIVIDUALS SELDOMLY
CHANGE THEIR OPINIONS,
SOCIETIES CHANGE BECAUSE OF COHORT
REPLACEMENT
THAT COHORT REPLACEMENT
CONSTITUTES A SILENT REVOLUTION
NOW A GRAPH I
FOUND VERY
INTERESTING
FROM A BOOK
THAT APPEARED
IN 1979,
PERHAPS EVEN
MORE
SHOCKING IN
ISRAEL THAN IN
THE
NETHERLANDS
THE
NETHERLANDS
AS A SOCIETY
WITH A HIGHER
PERCENT OF
JEWISH VICTIMS
THAN EXPECTED
FROM ITS LOW
ANTI-SEMITISM
AND ITS
INTERMEDIATE
SS-GRIP
WHY??
HOW I READ
NEWSPAPERS
WHO IS
ABLE TO
EXPLAIN
THIS
DRAWING?
ANY
UNDERGRADUATE
SOCIOLOGIST (NOT
ONLY A PH.D.
MACROSOCIOLOGIST)
SHOULD BE ABLE TO
DO SO
WHAT DOES THE
ABBREVIATION
OECD STAND FOR?
FIND ON THE WEB
THIS OECD REPORT!
IS ISRAEL IN ITS
TABLES AND
GRAPHS?
AGAIN
OECD
AFTER READING
NEWSPAPERS
I SOMETIMES GO TO
WEBSITES OF
NATIONAL STATISTICAL
OFFICES
UNITED KINGDOM
THE NETHERLANDS
NILI
BIBIKARZAI
2003
THE
TREND
IN PRETAX
AND
AFTERTAX
GINI’S?
IF SOCIOLOGY’S
QUESTIONS ARE
ABOUT SOCIETIES
WHAT
CHARACTERISTICS
OF SOCIETIES ARE
STUDIED BY
SOCIOLOGY?
I GROUP THESE
CHARACTERISTICS
INTO THREE
CATEGORIES
FROM ADAM FERGUSON TO KARL
MARX AND WERNER SOMBART
A PROBLEM SHIFT AS REGARD
INEQUALITY AS ONE OF SOCIOLOGY’S
THREE MAIN PROBLEMS:
NOT ONLY DISPARITIES BETWEEN THE
INHABITANTS OF A SOCIETY AT ONE
MOMENT IN TIME,
BUT ALSO THEIR DOWNWARD AND
UPWARD MOBILITY
FROM THOMAS HOBBES TO EMILE
DURKHEIM
A PROBLEM SHIFT AS REGARDS
(DIS)COHESION AS ONE OF
SOCIOLOGY’S THREE MAIN
PROBLEMS:
NOT ONLY VIOLENCE BETWEEN
THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY, BUT
ALSO ISOLATION AND
PREFERRING SUICIDE TO LIVING
WITHIN SOCIETY
FROM ADAM SMITH TO MAX WEBER
A PROBLEM SHIFT AS REGARDS
RATIONALIZATION AS ONE OF
SOCIOLOGY’S MAIN PROBLEMS:
NOT ONLY ECONOMIC GROWTH (AS
RATIONALIZATION OF A SOCIETY’S
ECONOMY BY FREE MARKETS),
BUT ALSO BUREAUCRATIZATION (AS
RATIONALIZATION OF A SOCIETY’S POLITY
BY WRITTEN LAWS)
AND DISENCHANTMENT (AS
RATIONALIZATION OF A SOCIETY’S
RELIGIONS BY A MORE AND MORE
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY)