Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2006. / (UMI)AAI3250858. Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-02, Section: A, page: 0683. Adviser: Clarence E. Walker.

This thesis focuses on methodological possibilities of language as a basis for history of sociology. Current professional history of sociology takes predominantly the form of institutional studies characterized by an attention to social context of knowledge production. Language orientation provides an unutilized opportunity for intellectual history - a supposedly stale alternative of institutional tradition. Development of language-based history creates a methodological position close to approaches common in history of natural sciences. Critical analysis of metaphor studies in sociology serves as an example of risks and challenges of language focus which assists us with articulation of our own methodological position. Following studies of Ladislav Kvasz, historian of natural sciences, the thesis offers methodological apparatus adapted to sociology. Key feature of the presented tool is a capability to distinguish between three levels of language of sociological theory: data, models and theory. These levels differ in functions which they ascribe to corresponding language elements and rising language powers (to constitute new objects and to integrate the ones positioned below). Application of our method is illustrated by two examples. Cursory excursion into history of mathematics in sociology...

US sociology has historically denied slavery and colonialism as demanding of sociological study. The roots of this can be examined at the turn of the twentieth century in the early years of the institutionalization of the discipline in American universities. The inattention stems from a white supremacist racial ontology that underpins US sociology in general (embedded in the category of modernity and the category of sociology itself). There are traces or identifiable ‘moments of silencing’ during the first ten years of the American Journal of Sociology (AJS), the discipline’s first professional journal in the US, in which early (white) sociologists hide the colonial and slavery-dependent material roots of modernity behind a “positivistic” philosophy of social science and a mix of the biologically and culturally inflected ideologies of scientific racism. The persistence of the notion of modernity as given and the unconscious positivist epistemology of mainstream US sociology causes it to stall in face of the paralyzing contradiction between a stated interest in addressing inequality and a simultaneous refusal to examine the issues of power and inequality in the conditions of its own founding.

Pitirim A. Sorokin est l'un des plus importants sociologues américains du XXe siècle. Ses contributions à la sociologie sont non seulement nombreuses, mais surtout diversifiées. La majorité de ses ouvrages furent traduits et toutes les grandes langues du monde ont accès à au moins un de ses livres. Cependant, en Occident, sa carrière précédant son émigration aux États-Unis fut longtemps négligée, les critiques s'intéressant plutôt à ses écrits post-Russie. Par ailleurs, très peu d'écrits francophones existent sur cette grande figure de la sociologie américaine. Remédiant à cette situation, ce mémoire revisite la vie et l'oeuvre de Sorokin en Russie et présente aux lecteurs contemporains la partie éclipsée de sa carrière. Plus précisément, la recherche porte sur la carrière russe de Pitirim A. Sorokin d'un point de vue biographique et sociologique. La question au coeur du travail est la suivante : Comment expliquer la production sociologique de Pitirim A. Sorokin en Russie? Dans une première partie est présentée sa biographie entre 1889 et 1923. L'objectif est de décrire la formation de son habitus et les diverses positions qu'il occupa. La seconde partie, quant à elle, résume les recherches produites par le sociologue avant son exil et montre en quoi ses prises de positions scientifiques furent déterminées par son parcours. / Pitirim Aleksandrovich Sorokin is one of the greatest American sociologists of the XXth century. His contributions to sociology are not only numerous but, more importantly, diversified. The majority of his writings have been translated and most of the languages of the world have at least access to one of his books. Nonetheless, in the Western world, his career before his emigration to the United-States has been neglected for a long time, because his critics were mostly interested in his writings post-Russia. Furthermore, very few French writings exist on this classic of American sociology. Solving this situation, this memoir revisit the life and work of Sorokin in Russia and presents to contemporary readers the eclipsed part of his career. More to the point, this research focuses on the Russian career of Pitirim A. Sorokin from a biographical and sociological point of view. The question at the center of it is as follow : How can one explain the sociological production of Pitirim A. Sorokin in Russia? In the first part, his biography from 1889 to 1923 will be presented. The objective is to describe the development of his ''habitus'' and the diverse positions that he occupied. The second part summarizes the researches produced by the sociologist before his exile and explain his scientific positions.

This work describes how sociology as an academic discipline was introduced, established and pursued at Swedish universities during the period 1930-1955. The main purpose is to follow the establishment of sociology and call attention to dominating ideas of sociology, science and society, and also to reflect the relation between sociology and the demands and expectations of society. This academic institutionalization is considered a continuously changing process where centers and boundaries are formulated and reformulated in accordance with contemporary conditions and preferences of the actors. Expectations on the discipline are investigated, as they were expressed in official inquiries and other political settings as well as in common press. Changes in university structure that led up to the establishment of sociology as a discipline are studied, as well as the official investigations that directly preceded the set up. Institutional activities in the new discipline are dealt with; as are persons, curricula, dissertations and investigations. Internal debates and conflicts are studied and analyzed. The reception of sociology is considered, as well as the use of sociological knowledge in academy, industry and other domains. A main question is how sociology, when established, was understood and pursued. Soon, a clear conception was established in leading quarters. According to this conception, sociology was to be recognized as a specialized discipline alongside other disciplines of social science. The object of sociology was to study modern society and its social conditions, preferably in Sweden. The method of study was to be scientifically empirical, which, above all, meant quantitative field surveys. This study analyzes the formation of this idea of sociology. It was contested, but persons representing deviating conceptions were marginalized. The "boundary-work" that was carried out is therefore considered especially significant. The boundaries were about the implication of the concept of sociology, and conflicts and antagonisms revealed in the boundary-work are analyzed. It is argued that the polemical and dichotomizing rhetoric style used by the actors was of significant importance. By describing, defining and legitimating sociology in terms of opposites: empirical rather than speculative, American rather than continental, quantitative rather than qualitative, it was emphasized that the discipline of sociology was new, scientific and necessary for a modern and progressive community like Swedish society. / digitalisering@umu

This thesis examines the extent to which Ibn Khaldun can legitimately be considered a founding father of sociology. To pursue this research, Khaldun's theoretical framework will be compared with four Western scholars: Auguste Comte, Emile Durkheim, Giambattista Vico, and Ludwig Gumplowicz. This paper begins with an Introduction (Chapter I), followed by a general overview of Khaldun's work (Chapter II). Next, Khaldun's work is compared to that of Auguste Comte (Chapter III), Emile Durkheim (Chapter IV), Ludwig Gumplowicz (Chapter V) and Giambattista Vico (Chapter VI). In each of these chapters, Khaldun is compared and contrasted to the other social theorist, illustrating their similarities and considering their differences. Finally, in Chapter VII, I put forth conclusions that consider the extent to which Khaldun can validly be considered a founding father of sociology.

Depuis plus d’une soixantaine d’années, le débat de politique étrangère aux Etats-Unis fait référence à la « tradition » ou la « théorie » de la guerre juste et se décline en partie autour de conceptions, de critères et de postures qui y sont apparentés. La pratique est vivifiée par des philosophes, des politologues, des théologiens inscrits dans des contextes variés dont Michael Walzer, Jean B. Elshtain, James T. Johnson et George Weigel. Malgré des trajectoires et des choix dissemblables, ils ont notamment en commun de faire face à d’autres penseurs développant des perspectives moins enclines à admettre la mise en relation qu’ils pratiquent entre guerre et morale. Leurs prises de parole croisent celles de plusieurs séries de référents, d'alliés et de contradicteurs dont Reinhold Niebuhr, Paul Ramsey, William O’Brien, John Courtney Murray mais aussi Hans Morgenthau et plus récemment Richard Rorty, Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Edward Saïd, Drew Christiansen, Martin L. Cook, John Langan, ou Bryan Hehir. La longévité de la communauté socio-discursive démontre la persistance d’un engagement intellectuel marqué par la volonté de promouvoir la justice et les principes éthiques et de dissoudre la dichotomie bellicisme/irénisme, cynisme/messianisme, pour défendre une « réalité morale de la guerre » située dans une forme avancée de « réalisme moral ». Les dynamiques à l’œuvre s’avèrent orientées par la recherche d’une « juste » conjugaison éthico-politique mais aussi par des logiques de positionnement et d’occupation au sein d’espaces délibératifs hautement conflictuels. Leur interprétation mobilise une perspective politologique socio-discursive et conflictualiste : socio-discursive car ancrée dans la pragmatique interactionniste développée par le linguiste Dominique Maingueneau et conflictualiste au sens que lui donne le sociologue Randall Collins. Elle souligne, pour finir, l’intérêt exploratoire des notions d’inter et de contre-discours mais aussi de communauté et de coalition socio-discursives. / For more than sixty years, the debate about the US foreign policy has referred to the “just war” theory. It has been based on conceptions and paradigms connected to that traditional notion of “just war” and invigorated by philosophers, political scientists or theologians including Michael Walzer, Jean B. Elshtain, James T. Johnson and George Weigel. The latter have different backgrounds and made dissimilar intellectual choices but they have common points, in particular a common aim to confront theorists that are not prone to link war and ethics. The “just war” thinkers interacts with several referred authors, with followers and detractors, including Reinhold Niebuhr, Paul Ramsey, William O’Brien, John Courtney Murray but also Hans Morgenthau and more recently, Richard Rorty, Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Edward Saïd, Martin L. Cook, Drew Christiansen, John Langan, or Bryan Hehir. The durability of the socio-discursive community shows the persistence of an intellectual involvement characterized by the will to promote justice and ethical principles and to make the dichotomy between warmongering and irenicism, between cynicism and messianism, to defend the “moral reality of mar” belonging to an advanced form of “moral realism”. The dynamics at work turn out to be oriented by the seaking of a “just” combination between politics and ethics but also by positioning and occupancy logics within highly controversial deliberative areas. Therefore, the interpretation of the contemporary “just war” intellectual discourse requests the use of a socio-discursive and conflictualist perspective, issued from Dominique Maingueneau’s pragmatic theory and from Randall Collins’ sociology of intellectual conflicts. Lastly, the debates about a “just war” theory highlights interpretative interest of inter- and counter- discourse notions but also of socio-discursive coalitions and communities.

In the last 30 years many changes have taken place within the Cowlitz Indian Tribe. These changes involve the tribe’s sovereignty and have greatly impacted the emic identity of the tribe. Previous identity research with the Cowlitz predates these changes and no longer accurately describe the Cowlitz. The question for this research was how have these changes affected the emic identity of the Cowlitz today as seen in their community and interactions? And how does their identity now compare with their identity in the times of pre-contact and initial contact with whites? This research uses Manuel DeLanda’s assemblage theory to assess and compare the emic identity of the contemporary and historical tribe in terms of sovereignty, identity, and cultural rejuvenation. When the structure, relationships, activities, and purposes of the tribe and groups within the contemporary tribe were analyzed, there was a striking resemblance to the community system described in early settler journals and histories of the Cowlitz. The research was cross-sectional, including ethnographic study, interviews of tribal members, document analysis, and historical analysis. In an attempt to allow the Cowlitz people to speak for themselves rather than project ideas onto the tribe, each section of the research first allows tribal members to voice their opinions and then relies on Cowlitz voices to confirm the analysis. The final dissertation was then submitted to the tribe for comment.

This thesis examines the regulation of women in public space in Liverpool between 1908 and 1957. It considers the complex relationship between the laws used to police solicitation, governmental debate about female prostitution and local purity campaigners’ concerns with the moral vulnerability of young, working-class, urban women. It is argued that the ways in which prostitution was understood and managed had an impact upon all women’s access to and use of public space, together with wider definitions of female morality and immorality. The thesis adds to historical understandings about the implications of prostitution regulation in the twentieth century, by moving away from London-focused histories to offer a detailed analysis of the ways in which national debates about vice were taken up at local level and with what consequences. I begin by exploring the problems with policing prostitution in the early-twentieth century and argue that increasing concern about the difficulty in differentiating prostitutes from ‘ordinary’ women provoked anxiety amongst law makers and government officials alike. It is argued that the debates canvassed by the 1927 Macmillan Committee indicate the degree to which moral codes about female sexuality informed official approaches to prostitution. The thesis considers the implications of these broad debates in Liverpool. Focusing on the work of the Liverpool Vigilance Association (LVA), it is proposed that fears about the moral threat of prostitution fuelled the organisation’s belief in the necessity of preventative patrol work centred on the moral surveillance of young, working-class women. This thesis shows that in interwar Liverpool, women’s movements were circumscribed first and foremost by their gender. Traditional, nineteenth-century ideas about women’s place within the domestic sphere created a sense among local purity campaigners that female morality was being threatened by women’s visibility in urban spaces. Other aspects of social status, such as class, race and employment experiences, heightened the interest of the LVA in targeting distinctive groups of women. The thesis demonstrates that in their efforts to regulate women’s movements through the city of Liverpool, local purists singled-out working-class and immigrant (especially Irish) women, as they believed them to be the most susceptible to corruption. This thesis draws on a wide range of archival sources, especially Home Office Records relating to the Public Places (Order) Bill and the establishment of the 1927 Macmillan Committee, as well as the LVA archive, in order to show how national and local policies on prostitution were both interdependent and distinct.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / A theoretical understanding of stratification and inequality is necessary to understand social phenomena in general. Unfortunately, professional sociology in the United States has historically promoted a limited theoretical understanding of stratification that tends to ignore economic realities, social structures, institutional mechanisms, power relations, and other important factors such as racial discrimination in reproducing social class. In fact, mainstream sociology has replaced class-based theories altogether with the concept of socio-economic status (SES) and, at the same time, all too often embraces problematic theories that justify inequality. This critical literature review of social class in American sociology attempts to: 1) provide a more comprehensive history of sociological theory in the United States regarding stratification and social class, 2) expose the sociological factors affecting these social theories and concepts, and 3) deconstruct and critique mainstream social theories that offer weak explanations of stratification.