Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sociology as a discipline: Quasi-science and quasi-humanities

  • Published:
The American Sociologist Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sociologists, like other professionals and academic practitioners, have engaged in a collective project—“becoming a science.” This article traces the occupational and intellectual components of that project, focusing especially on the model of science employed, the limits of that model, and the limits of the science model in general. It is argued that sociology is a quasi-science and a quasi-humanities. Unfortunately, sociology has not systematically pursued its links to the humanities. The article argues for maintaining the empirical and explanatory thrust of the science model, while recognizing the extent to which concepts and theories are civilizationally embedded. The article ends with suggestions for systematically enriching sociology by closer links to the humanities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, Andrew. 1988.The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1990. “Positivism and Interpretation in Sociology: Lessons for Sociologists from the History of Stress Research,”Sociological Forum 5: 435–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Theodore, and Seymour Warkov. 1961. “Organizational Size and Functional Complexity.”American Sociological Review 26 (February): 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, Kenneth, James Bohman and Thomas McCarthy, ed. 1986.After Philosophy: End or Transformation? Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendix, Reinhard. 1956.Work and Authority in Industry: Ideologies of Management in the Course of Industrialization. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berle, A. A., and Gardner C. Means. 1932.The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, Peter M., and Richard A. Schoenherr. 1971.The Structure of Organizations. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaug, Mark. 1980. “Kuhn versus Lakatos, or Paradigms versus Research Programs in the History of Economics.” Pp. 137–159 in Gutting.

  • Bridgeman, Percy W. 1927.The Logic of Modern Physics. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Richard H. 1977.A Poetic for Sociology: Toward a Logic of Discovery for the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1989.Social Science as Civic Discourse: Essays on the Invention, Legitimation, and Uses of Social Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Donald T. (1969). “Ethnocentrism of Disciplines and the Fish Scale Model of Disciplines.” Pp. 328–348 inInterdisciplinary Relationships in the Social Sciences, ed. Muzafer Sherif and Carolyn Sherif. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchland, Paul A. and C. A. Hooker, eds. (1985).Images of Science: Essays in Realism and Empiricism, with a reply from Bas C. Van Frasen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, Stephen, Gary Simon, and Jonathan R. Cole. 1988. “Do Journal Rejection Rates Index Consensus,”American Sociological Review 53 (February): 152–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, James S. 1974. “Inequality, Sociology, and Moral Philosophy.”American Journal of Sociology 80 (November): 739–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ————— 1986. “Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action.”American Journal of Sociology 91 (May): 1309–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Randall. 1987. “Looking Forward or Looking Back? Reply to Denzin.”American Journal of Sociology 93 (July): 180–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1989. “Sociology: Proscience or Antiscience?”American Sociological Review 52 (February): 124–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip. 1985. “Generalization and the Social Psychology of Other Worlds.” Pp. 42–60 in Fiske and Shweder.

  • D’Andrade, Roy. 1985. “Three Scientific World Views and the Covering Law Model.” Pp. 19–41 in Fiske and Shweder.

  • Denzin, Norman. 1987. “The Death of Sociology in the 1980s: Comment on Collins.”American Journal of Sociology 93 (July): 175–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1990. “Reading Cultural Texts: Comment on Griswold.”American Journal of Sociology 95 (May) 1577–1580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, Lex. 1985.In Defense of Organization Theory: A Reply to the Critics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1988. “In Successful Defence of Organization Theory: A Routing of the Critics.”Organization Studies 9/1: 28–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, Emile. 1893/1949 trans.Division of Labor In Society. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Peter B. and John D. Stephens. 1988. “Development and the World Economy.” Pp. 739–74 inHandbook of Sociology, ed. N.J. Smelser. Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallers, Lloyd A. 1973.Inequality: Social Stratification Reconsidered. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, Donald W and Richard A. Shweder. 1985.Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedland, Roger and Robert Alford. 1991. “Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions.” Pp. 232–266 inThe New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ed. Walter W. Powell and Paul J. Di Maggio, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, Stephan and Jonathan Turner. 1986. “What Makes a Science Mature: Organizational Control in Scientific Production.” Sociological Theory 4, 7: 143–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furner, Mary O. 1975.Advocacy and Objectivity: A Crisis in the Professionalization of American Social Science, 1865–1905. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon, John H. 1990. “The Self, Its Voices, and Their Discord.” New York: SUNY Stony Brook, Department of Sociology: unpublished paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1978. “Positivism and its Critics.” Pp. 237–86 inA History of Sociological Analysis. ed. Tom Bottomore and Robert Nisbet. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giles, Michael W., Francie Mizell, and David Patterson. 1989. “Political Scientists’ Journal Evaluations Revisited,”PS: Political Sciences and Politics 8: 254–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griswold, Wendy. 1986.Renaissance Revivals: City Comedy and Revenge Tragedy in the London Theatre from 1576 to 1980. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1987a. “The Fabrication of Meaning: Literary Interpretation in the United States, Great Britain, and the West Indies,”American Journal of Sociology 92 (March): 1077–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1987b. “A Methodological Framework for the Sociology of Culture,” Pp. 1–35 inSociological Methodology, v. 17, ed. Clifford Clogg. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1990. “Provisional, Provincial Positivism: Reply to Denzin,”American Journal of Sociology 95 (May): 1580–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gusfield, Joseph. 1981. “The Culture of Public Problems: Drinking-Driving and the Symbolic Order”. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutting, Gary, ed. 1980.Paradigms and Revolutions: Appraisals and Applications of Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargens, Lowell L. 1988. “Consensus and Rejection Rates,”American Sociological Review 53 (February): 137–151 and 157–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, Carl G., and P. Oppenheim. 1948. “Studies in the Logic of Explanation.”Philosophy of Science 15.

  • Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1987.The New History and the Old: Critical Essays and Reappraisals. Cambridge, Mass. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Himmelstein, Jerome and Mayer N. Zald 1984. “American Conservatism and Government Funding of the Social Sciences and the Arts,”Sociological Inquiry. 54 (Spring): 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, Albert O. 1977.The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before Its Triumph. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, Everett C. 1958.Men and Their Work. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasso, Guillermina. 1978. “On the Justice of Earnings: A New Specification of the Justice Evaluation Function.”American Journal of Sociology 83 (May): 1398–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —————. 1980. “A New Theory of Distributive Justice,”American Sociological Review 45 (November): 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, Gertrude and Philip Selznick. 1964. “A Normative Theory of Culture.”American Sociological Review 29 (October): 653–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kevlea, Daniel J. 1978.The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America. New York: Alfred Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lammers, Cornelis J. 1974. “Mono- and Poly-paradigmatic Developments in Natural and Social Sciences.” Pp. 123–147 inSocial Processes of Scientific Development, ed. R. Whitley. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, Magali Sarfatti. 1977.The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepenies, Wolf. 1988.Between Literature and Science: The Rise of Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, Alastair. 1984.After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G. and Johan P. Olsen. 1987. “Popular Sovereignty and the Search for Appropriate Institutions.”Journal of Public Policy 6: 341–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, Donald N. 1985.The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, John W. and W. Richard Scott. 1983.Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. Wright. 1959.The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modigliani, Andre and William A. Gamson. 1989. “Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach.”American Journal of Sociology 95, 1 (July): 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Barrington. Jr., 1966.Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D. S. and Hickson, D. J. 1976.Organizational Structure in its Context: The Aston Programme I. Farnborough, Hants.: Saxon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D. S. and Hinings, C. R. (eds.) 1976.Organizational Structure: Extensions and Replications: The Aston Programme II. Farnborough, Hants. UK: Saxon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D. S. and Payne, R. L. (eds.) 1977. Organizational Behavior in its Context: The Aston Programme III, Farnborough, Hants. UK: Saxon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, Dan 1990. “Polyphonic Ethnography.” Philadelphia, Pa.: Department of Fine Arts, University of Pennsylvania: unpublished paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, Philip. 1961. “Sociology and Natural Law.”Natural Law Forum 6: 84–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, William. 1989. “Some Reflections on the Golden Age of Social Psychology.”Social Psychology Quarterly 52: 88–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapere, Dudley. 1980. “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.” Pp. 27–38 in Gutting.

  • Spencer, Martin E. 1982. “The Ontologies of Social Science.”Philosophy of Social Sciences 12: 121–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ————— 1987. “The Imperfect Empiricism of the Social Sciences.”Sociological Forum 2, 2: 331–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegmuller, Wolfgang. 1980. “Accidental (“non-substantial”) Theory Change and Theory Dislodgement.” Pp. 75–97 in Gutting.

  • ——. 1976.The Structure and Dynamics of Theories. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, Arthur W. 1982. “Should Sociologists Forget Their Mothers and Fathers?”American Sociologist 17: 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, George M., John W. Meyer, Francisco O. Ramirez, John Boli. 1987.Institutional Structure: Constituting State, Society and the Individual. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Stephen Park, and Jonathan H. Turner. 1990.The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, David G. and Joseph Berger. 1985. “Do Sociological Theories Grow?”American Journal of Sociology 90, 4 (January): 697–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, Michael. 1983.Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, Richard. 1984.The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zald, Mayer N. 1989. “The Sociology of the Humanities: Collective Projects.” Unpublished paper originally delivered at a plenary meeting of the Southern Sociological Society, April 15, 1989. Norfolk, Virginia.

  • —— 1999. “History, Sociology, and Theories of Organization.” Pp. 81–108 inInstitutions in American Society: Essays in Market, Political, and Social Organization, ed. John E. Jackson. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, The University of Michigan, 3012 Literature, Science and the Arts Building, 48109-1382, Ann Arbor, MI

    Mayer N. Zald (sociology professor)

Authors
  1. Mayer N. Zald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This article is a revision of a paper presented at the Plenary Session, The Future of Sociology, Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, August 24, 1988, Atlanta, Georgia. I have discussed the issues raised in this paper with, and received comments on previous drafts from, many colleagues: Andrew Abbott, Renee Anspach, Joseph Berger, Philip Converse, Claude Fischer, Herbert Gans, Michael Kennedy, Albert J. Rothenberg, AndrewScott, Anne Scott, Robert Scott, William Sewell, Jr., Margaret Somers, Sheldon Stryker, and Charles Tilly. They are not responsible for its sins.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zald, M.N. Sociology as a discipline: Quasi-science and quasi-humanities. Am Soc 22, 165–187 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691895

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02691895

Keywords

Search

Navigation