Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T18:10:35.384Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Discussion: Professionalism and Disciplinarianism: Two Styles of Sociological Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Irving Louis Horowitz
Irving Louis Horowitz*
Affiliation:
Washington University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During the last decade, in 1958 to be precise, an organizational confrontation took place: the essential issue before its membership was this: should the American Sociological Society (ASS) be rechristened the American Sociological Association (ASA). The results of the vote conclusively demonstrated that for a majority of the participants, it was preferable to be known as a group of ASA's rather than a bunch of ASS's.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , July 1964 , pp. 275 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © 1964 by Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The reader should be appraised of the fact that this paper represents one chunk of an ongoing effort to develop a sociology of sociology. For other related aspects of this effort, I should like to draw the attention of the reader to the following essays of mine:

“Establishment Sociology: The Value of Being Value Free”, Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy and the Social Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 2 (1963), pp. 129-140.

“Consensus, Conflict and Cooperation: A Sociological Inventory”, Social Forces, Vol. 41, No. 2 (Dec. 1962), pp. 177-188.

“Social Science Objectivity and Value Neutrality: Historical Problems and Projections”, Diogenes: International Review of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies, Vol. 39 (Fall 1962), pp. 17-44.

“Sociology and Politics: The Myth of Functionalism Revisited”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 25, No. 4 (May, 1963), pp. 248-264.

“Sociology for Sale”, Studies on the Left, Vol. 3, No. 3 (Summer 1963), pp. 109-115.

“Anthropology for Sociologists: Cross Disciplinary Research as Scientific Humanism”, Social Problems, Vol. 11, No. 2 (Fall, 1963) pp. 201-206.

There is also a small, but impressive body of literature which has for its focus problems in the sociology of sociology.

Alvin W. Gouldner, “Anti-Minotaur: The Myth of a Value-Free Sociology,” Social Problems, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Winter, 1962), pp. 199-213.

C. Wright Mills, “Two Styles of Research in Current Social Studies,” Philosophy of Science, Vol. 20, No. 4 (October, 1953), pp. 266-275.

Samuel Stouffer, “Some Observations on Study Design,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 55, No. 3 (November, 1950), pp. 355-361.

Robert W. Habenstein, “Critique of ‘Profession’ as a Sociological Category”, The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4 (Autumn, 1963), pp. 291-300.

Talcott Parsons, “The Professions and the Social Structure”, Social Forces, Vol. 17, No. 4 (May, 1939), pp. 457-467.

William J. Goode, “Community Within a Community: The Professions”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 22, No. 2 (April 1957), pp. 194-200.

Alfred McClung Lee, “Annual Report for 1962-1963 of the SSSP Representative to the ASA Council”, Social Problems, Vol. 11, No. 3, (Winter, 1964), pp. 319-321.

Robert K. Merton, “The Role of the Intellectual in Public Bureaucracy”, Social Forces, Vol. 23 No. 4 (May, 1945), pp. 405-415.