The American Sociologist

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 309–322 | Cite as

Much Ado About Nothing?

Remarks on Michael Burawoy’s Presidential Address
Article

Abstract

We can only welcome the discourse that has been initiated in our professional community with the concept of public sociology in the focus. Undoubtedly, Michael Burawoy has indisputable merits in fuelling this international dialogue. I find, however, that his position and conceptual framework is debatable at several points, therefore my review is on the side of those who criticize his ideas. My paper is divided into three parts: in keeping with the idea that the drop mirrors the ocean, I will start with the detailed critique of a single paragraph—the one which makes comments on his table entitled Types of sociological knowledge. It will be argued that by switching his viewpoints and using vaguely defined notions without empirical evidences he often tackles his subject inconsistently. Secondly, I intend to offer an alternative, three-dimensional conceptual model in which the social scientist’s prestige, influence and position on the action chain is taken into account as the main analytical aspects of the relationship between her/him and the public. Finally, based on this model, I propose to identify some strategies in order to find a better balance between the public and professional activity of social scientists.

Keywords

Burawoy Public sociology Critique Alternative model 

References

  1. Brady, D. (2004). Why public sociology may fail? Social Forces, 82(4), 1 (June).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burawoy, M. (2005). 2004 American sociological association presidential address: For public sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(2), 259–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burawoy, M. (2006). A public sociology for human rights. Introduction. In J. Blau, & K. I. Smith (Eds.) Public sociology reader. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  4. Calhoun, C. (2005). The promise of public sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Etzioni, A. (2005). Bookmarks for public sociologists. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 373–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gans, H. (1989). Sociology in America: The discipline and the public, ASA, 1988 presidential address. American Sociological Review, 54, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nielsen, F. (2004). The Vacant’We’: Remarks on public sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1619–1629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Tittle, C. R. (2004). The arrogance of public sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1639–1643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Gender and Culture Corvinus University of BudapestBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations