On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Brett Magill wrote:
>
> Though none will be satisfied with any definition of
> sociology proposed, I will venture to say that it is a
> discipline that makes an effort to understand things
> social. Structures, culture, interactions, beliefs
> and values, and their mutual influences.
Yes, but which "things social" and from what theoretical perspective? I
remember when "order" models prevailed, women were defined as "lactating
organisms" (thus legitimating the sexual division of labor), gender
inequality at home and in the occupational structure was considered
"functional" for marital integration and solidarity, "underdevelopment"
was explained as an effect of lack of "achievement motivation," the
nuclear family was a "functional prerequisite of all societies," and
social inequality was simply "an unconsciously evolved mechanism" to make
sure talented people were motivated to fulfill functionally important
positions... and I could go on....
Do you think all those views were "scientific" and "value free"?
Best,
Martha E. Gimenez
Department of Sociology
Campus Box 327
University of Colorado at Boulder
Boulder, Colorado 80309
Voice: 303-492-7080
Fax: 303-492-8878
