Abstract
Burawoy’s manifesto connects to a long series of debates on the role of science in society as well as on the myth of pure science. This paper argues that the gap between professional sociology and public sociology is far from being unbridgeable and that public sociology is not suppressed to the extent portrayed by Burawoy. In late modern societies a number of schools, including various scientific, public and intellectual movements have questioned the possibility, value position and social relevance of a functionally differentiated pure science by applying the sine qua non of modernity, i.e. critical reflection, to science. According to the argument developed here, also illustrated by a personal example, Burawoy could possibly prevent the gate-keepers of the empire of pure science from closing the otherwise open gates in front of his program and in front of critical reflection if only he used less harsh war-cries and were more careful in detecting the changes he himself urges.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is in this spirit that Burawoy acted when, as President of the American Sociological Association, he initiated (and succeeded in achieving) that the Society take position in a statement against the war on Iraq or against the legal limitations on same-sex marriage.
Although he does not make it explicit, but with the term ‘social physics’ Turner reaches back to Comte’s positivist program which only very few scientist would take today in this form.
It is not my goal to review here all the radical critiques, with McLaughlin et al having done so (McLaughlin et al. 2005: 137–138)
At one place Beck uses six dimensions to compare late (reflexive) modern and classic modern societies. (Beck 1994: 94–96). 1. Early industrial modernization had a linear view of history, while self-inflicted insecurities and dangers are characteristic to the age of reflexive modernization. 2. What lay in the background of industrial modernization was instrumental rationality, but late modernity is characterized by reflexivity and taking into account corollary consequences. 3. Industrial modernization viewed itself as modern, while reflexive modernity—viewed from its own age—looks half-modern only. 4. In the age of industrial modernization large groups and categories, such as class, were used in thinking; the age of reflexive modernity, in turn, is characterized by individualization. 5. Early modernization was accompanied by the functional differentiation of society; in the age of reflexive modernity interaction and coordination between sub-systems intensifies. 6. Finally, the politics of early modernity was determined by the division between left and right but in late modernity differences between the two fade into the background and their place are taken by the struggle between politics and -‘sub-politics,’ the opposition of security and risk.
The bestseller book No Logo: No Space, No Choice, No Jobs describes the misdemeanors of brand corporations and the relating movement of identity politics (Klein 2000).
Another aspect of the new wave of the science of public policy which stems from complexity and insecurity and which was overviewed here briefly, is discursive and constructivist public policy analysis.
For the past five years I have participated in the work of Hungarian civil organizations and movements as a volunteer and, in more fortunate periods, as a paid employee. Beside this I completed two degrees and at present I am ‘wrestling’ with a training program in sociology and economy at a Hungarian University.
The picture is of course complicated; these lines do not serve to prompt any viewpoint on water privatization, let alone on the question of the privatization of public utilities in general. The aforesaid serves only to illustrate my argument concerning the research methodology of social science and, more precisely, its epistemological position.
References
Ágh, A. (2003). Közpolitika [Public Policy]. In G. János (Ed.) Mi a Politika? Bevezetés a Politika Világába [What is Politics: Introduction to World of Politics] pp. 119–163. Budapest: Osiris.
Arendt, H. (2005). The promise of politics. New York: Schocken Books.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
Beck, U. (1994). The reinvention of politics: Towards a theory of reflexive modernization. In U. Beck, A. Giddens, & S. Lash (Eds.) Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order pp. 1–55. Cambridge: Polity.
Beck, U. (2005). How not to become a museum piece. British Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 335–343.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2001). A Decentered theory of governance: Rational choice, institutionalism, and interpretation. University of California, Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, Working Paper (WP2001-10).
Boda, Z., Scheiring, G., Hall, D., & Lobina, E. (2006). Social policy, regulation and private sector water supply: The case of Hungary. Geneva: UNRISD Working Papers.
Braithwaite, J. (2005). For public social science. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 345–353.
Brint, S. (2005). Guide for the perplexed: On Michael Burawoy’s ‘public sociology’. The American Sociologist, 36(3–4), 5–26.
Burawoy, M. (2005a). Third-wave sociology and the end of pure science. The American Sociologist, 36(3–4), 152–165.
Burawoy, M. (2005b). For public sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(2), 259–294.
Deflem, M. (2006). Save sociology. Last retrieved at 1 May 2007, http://www.savesociology.org.
Dryzek, J. (1990). Discursive democracy: Politics, policy, and political science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Etzioni, A. (2005). Bookmarks for public sociologists. The British Journal of Sociology, 56(3), 373–378.
European Commission. (2007). Science and society portal. Last retrieved at 1 May 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/home_en.cfm.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739–755.
Gagdil, M., Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1993). Indigenous knowledge for biodiversity conservation. Ambio, 22(2–3), 151–156.
Ghamari-Tabrizi, B. (2005). Can Burawoy make everybody happy? Comments on public sociology. Critical Sociology, 31(3), 361–369.
International Science Shop Network. (2007). Mission statement. Last Retrieved 1 May 2007. http://www.scienceshops.org/new%20web-content/framesets/fs-about.html.
Kalb, D. (2006). Uses of local knowledge. In R. E. Goodin, & C. H. Tilly (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis pp. 579–594. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. (1959). An answer to the question: What is enlightenment? In Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals and What is Enlightenment? Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Klein, N. (2000). No logo: No space, no choice, no jobs. New York: Picador.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lengyel, G. (2006). A Szociológia Integritásáért: Hozzászólás Michael Burawoy Írásához. [For the integrity of sociology: A reply to Michael Burawoy]. Replika, 54–55, 105–112.
Leydesdorff, L., & Ward, J. (2005). Science shops: A kaleidoscope of science-society collaborations in Europe. Public Understanding of Science, 14(4), 353–372.
McLaughlin, N., Kowalchuk, L., & Turcotte, T. (2005). Why sociology does not need to be saved: Analytic reflections on public sociologies. The American Sociologist, 36(3–4), 133–151.
Némedi, D. (2006). A Civil Társadalom és a Társadalomtudományok: Megjegyzések Burawoy Közszociológiai Programjához. [Civil society and the social sciences: Comments on Burawoy’s public sociology program]. Replika, 54–55, 97–103.
Richardson, J. (2000). Government, interest groups and policy change. Political Studies, 48, 1006–1025.
Scheiring, G. (2003a). A GATS és a Szolgáltatások Piacosítása a Fenntarthatóság Mérlegén [GATS and the commodification of services with a view to sustainability], KKF Szakmai Füzetek. Journal of Budapest Business School, 12, 19–36.
Scheiring, G. (2003b). Közszolgálat és Emberi Jogok. [Public services and human rights]. Fundamentum, 7(3–4), 207–208.
Simon, H. A. (1982). Általános Bevezetés. in Korlátozott Racionalitás. Budapest: KJK, 169–175. General Introduction, pp. XIII–XIX in Models of Discovery and Other Topics in the Methods of Science. Dordrect: Reidel, 1977.
Tittle, C. (2004). The arrogance of public sociology. Social Forces, 82(4), 1.
Turner, J. H. (2005). Is public sociology such a good idea? The American Sociologist, 36(3–4), 27–45.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to Miklós Hadas (Corvinus University) who helped in publishing this essay originally prepared as an exam paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Scheiring, G. Barbarians at the Open Gates. Am Soc 38, 294–308 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-007-9012-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-007-9012-z