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, AND STARTED WORKING ON IT IN 1970

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

MY FAVORITE UNDERGRADUATE

BOOK

IT IS FROM 1954

AND I STUDIED IT IN 1965

I WAS NOT EXAMINED ABOUT IT

THE BIRTH-LEVEL OF DUTCH ROMAN-CATHOLICS

A DEMOGRAPHIC-SOCIOLOGICAL STUDY OF AN EMANCIPATED

MINORITY GROUP

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

THE FIRST SUCH THEORY I ENCOUNTERED

1895

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 BIBI-KARZAI2003

THE TREND IN PRE-TAX AND AFTER-TAX 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)