百道网
 您现在的位置:Fun书 > 社会学与生活(双语第10版)
社会学与生活(双语第10版)


社会学与生活(双语第10版)

作  者:(美)理查德·谢弗

出 版 社:世界图书出版公司

出版时间:2010年04月

定  价:78.00

I S B N :9787510017957

所属分类: 社会科学  社会科学  >  社会学    

标  签:  

[查看微博评论]

分享到:

TOP内容简介

社会学是一门包罗万象的科学,它不但涵盖性别、种族、阶层、年龄等议题,更是许多生活化知识的融汇,是集合人类、环境、政策、时代等生活中所有方面的学问。社会学家试图解释,是什么因素使得工作机会从美国转移到中国,女性在公共场所具有什么样的地位,以及计算机与网络技术的普及对社会有怎样的影响等关系到您日常生活中方方面面的问题。正如谢弗教授所建议的,要将你看到的材料与你的生活和经历联系起来。

本书简洁清晰地定义与分析社会学基本概念和研究方法,注重功能理论、冲突理论和互动理论的平衡阐释,强调社会学家检验与质疑人们日常生活行为的独特方法,教导读者如何运用社会学的想像力来探讨自己生活情境中的社会议题。在全球化的视野下使用跨文化的实例说明性别、年龄、种族、族群和阶级等社会区隔及其影响,并提供最近几年来社会学重要议题的最新研究成果。

双语版是在英文最新版本的基础上,根据第9版中译本加入关键词汇的中文注释形成的。读者通过本书不仅能够一睹国外优秀教材的风采,更能在双语阅读中准确地把握社会学术语的含义,进一步开拓社会学的想象力。

TOP作者简介

理查德•谢弗(Richard T. Schaefer),芝加哥大学社会学系硕士、博士,美国德保罗大学社会学教授;著有《社会学精要》、《种族与族群》和《美国的种族与族群性》等,文章常见诸《美国社会学期刊》、《当代社会学》、《社会学和社会研究》、《社会学教学》等著名学术期刊。谢弗教授拥有35年丰富的教学经验,他曾任教于大学、成人教育计划、护士学校,甚至在全美最高戒备的监狱里开设过社会学讲座。

TOP目录

Boxed Features 专栏目录 14
Social Policy Sections社会政策研究目录 16
Maps, Summing Up Tables, and Photo Essays地图、总结图表和图片文章 17
Preface前言 19

1 Understanding Sociology 理解社会学 1
What Is Sociology? 何谓社会学 3
The Sociological Imagination 社会学的想象力 3
Sociology and the Social Sciences 社会学与社会科学 6
Sociology and Common Sense 社会学与常识 7
What Is Sociological Theory? 何谓社会学理论 8
The Development of Sociology 社会学的发展 9
Early Thinkers 早期思想家 10
?魪mile Durkheim 爱弥尔•涂尔干 10
Max Weber 马克思•韦伯 11
Karl Marx 卡尔•马克思 11
Modern Developments 当代发展 12
Major Theoretical Perspectives 主要的理论观点 14
Functionalist Perspective 功能论 14
Conflict Perspective 冲突论 15
Interactionist Perspective 互动论 17
The Sociological Approach 社会学方法 18
Applied and Clinical Sociology 应用与临床社会学 19
Developing a Sociological Imagination 发展社会学的想象力 20
Theory in Practice 理论应用 20
Research in Action 当今研究 22
Thinking Globally 全球性思考 22
The Significance of Social Inequality社会不平等的显著性 22
Speaking across Race, Gender, and Religious Boundaries跨越种族、性别与宗教的鸿沟 23
Social Policy throughout the World 全球社会政策 24
Appendix: Careers in Sociology 附录:社会学系学生的就业机会 24


2 Sociological Research 社会学研究 30
What Is the Scientific Method? 何谓科学方法 32
Defining the Problem 定义问题 33
Reviewing the Literature 文献回顾 33
Formulating the Hypothesis 建立假设 34
Collecting and Analyzing Data 搜集与分析资料 35
Developing the Conclusion 形成结论 36
In Summary: The Scientific Method 摘要:科学方法 37
Major Research Designs主要的研究设计 37
Surveys 调查 37
Observation 观察 38
Experiments 实验 40
Use of Existing Sources 使用现存资料 41
Ethics of Research 研究伦理 43
Confidentiality 保密 44
Research Funding 研究资金 44
Value Neutrality 价值中立 46
Technology and Sociological Research 科技与社会学研究 47
SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH: Studying Human Sexuality 社会政策与社会学研究:研究人类的性倾向 49
Appendix I: Using Statistics, Tables, and Graphs 附录I:使用统计数据和图表 51
Appendix II: Writing a Research Report 附录II :撰写研究报告 53


3 Culture 文化 58
Culture and Society文化与社会 60
Development of Culture around the World
文化在世界的发展 63
Cultural Universals 普世文化 63
Innovation 创新 63
Globalization, Diffusion, and Technology 全球化、传播与科技 63
Biological Bases of Culture 文化的生物学基础 66
Elements of Culture 文化的要素 66
Language 语言 67
Norms 规范 70
Sanctions 奖惩 72
Values 价值观 73
Culture and the Dominant Ideology文化与主导意识形态 74
Cultural Variation 文化差异 76
Aspects of Cultural Variation 文化差异的层面 76
Attitudes toward Cultural Variation 对文化差异的态度 78
SOCIAL POLICY AND CULTURE: Bilingualism 社会政策与文化:双语并用 79



4 Socialization 社会化86
The Role of Socialization 社会化的角色 88
Social Environment: The Impact of Isolation 社会环境:孤立的影响 88
The Influence of Heredity 遗传影响 90
The Self and Socialization 自我与社会化 91
Sociological Approaches to the Self 社会学对于自我的研究方法 92
Psychological Approaches to the Self 心理学对于自我的研究方法 94
Socialization and the Life Course 社会化与生命历程 97
The Life Course 生命历程 97
Anticipatory Socialization and Resocialization 预先社会化与再社会化 98
Agents of Socialization 社会化机构 99
Family 家庭 99
School 学校 100
Peer Group 同辈团体 102
Mass Media and Technology 大众传媒与科技 103
Workplace 职场 103
Religion and the State 宗教与国家 105
SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIALIZATION: Child Care around the World 社会政策与社会化:全球的日间托养 105

5 Social Interaction, Groups, and Social Structure社会互动,团体与社会结构 111
Social Interaction and Reality 社会互动与现实 113
Elements of Social Structure 社会结构的要素 114
Statuses 身份 114
Social Roles 社会角色 116
Groups 团体 120
Social Networks 社会网络 123
Social Institutions 社会制度 125
Social Structure in Global Perspective 全球观点下的社会结构 127
Durkheim’s Mechanical and Organic Solidarity 涂尔干的机械团结与有机团结 128
T?觟nnies’s Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft 滕尼斯的礼俗社群与法理社会 128
Lenski’s Sociocultural Evolution Approach 伦斯基的社会文化演化观点 129
Understanding Organizations 理解组织 133
Formal Organizations and Bureaucracies 正式组织与官僚制 133
Characteristics of a Bureaucracy 官僚制的特色 133
Bureaucracy and Organizational Culture 官僚制与组织文化 137
The Changing Workplace 职场的变迁 138
Organizational Restructuring 组织的重构 138
Telecommuting 远距工作 139
Electronic Communication 电子通信 139
SOCIAL POLICY AND ORGANIZATIONS: The State of the Unions 社会政策与组织:工会的现状140


6 The Mass Media 大众传播媒体147
Sociological Perspectives on the Media 关于传播媒体的社会学观点 149
Functionalist View 功能论观点 149
Conflict View 冲突论观点 154
Feminist View 女性主义观点 158
Interactionist View 互动论观点 159
The Audience 观众 161
Who Is in the Audience?谁在观众里? 161
The Segmented Audience 受众的区隔 162
Audience Behavior 受众行为 162
The Media Industry 传播媒体业 163
Media Concentration 媒体集中化 164
The Media’s Global Reach 遍及全球的媒体 165
SOCIAL POLICY AND THE MASS MEDIA: Media Violence 社会政策与大众传媒:媒体暴力 167

7 Deviance and Social Control 越轨行为与社会控制 173
Social Control 社会控制 175
Conformity and Obedience 从众与顺从 176
Informal and Formal Social Control 非正式与正式社会控制 178
Law and Society 法律与社会 180
Deviance 越轨行为 181
What Is Deviance? 什么是越轨行为? 181
Explaining Deviance 越轨行为的解释 186
Crime 犯罪 193
Types of Crime 犯罪类型 193
Crime Statistics 犯罪统计 197
SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIAL CONTROL: The Death Penalty in the United States and Worldwide 社会政策与社会控制:美国和世界范围内的死刑政策 199


8 Stratification and Social Mobility in the United States 美国的阶层化和社会流动 205
Understanding Stratification 了解阶层化 207
Systems of Stratification 阶层体系 207
Perspectives on Stratification 阶层化的观点 211
Is Stratification Universal? 阶层化是放诸四海而皆准的吗? 214
Stratification by Social Class 社会阶级的阶层化 216
Measuring Social Class 测量社会阶级 216
Wealth and Income 财富与收入 217
Poverty 贫穷 218
Life Chances 生活际遇 222
Social Mobility 社会流动 223
Open versus Closed Stratification Systems 开放式阶级体系VS封闭式阶级体系 224
Types of Social Mobility 社会流动的种类 224
Social Mobility in the United States 美国的社会流动 224
SOCIAL POLICY AND STRATIFICATION: Rethinking Welfare in North America and Europe社会政策与阶层化:重新思考欧美的福利政策 226


9 Global Inequality 全球不平等 233
The Global Divide 全球区隔 235
Stratification in the World System 世界体系的阶层化 236
The Legacy of Colonialism 殖民主义的遗产 238
Multinational Corporations 多国企业 239
Worldwide Poverty 世界性贫穷 241
Modernization 现代化 242
Stratification within Nations: A Compara-
tive Perspective 国家内的阶层化:一个比较的观点 245
Distribution of Wealth and Income 财富和收入的分布 245
Social Mobility 社会流动 246
Case Study: Stratification in Mexico 案例研究:墨西哥的阶层化 248
Mexico’s Economy 墨西哥的经济 248
Race Relations in Mexico: The Color Hierarchy墨西哥的种族关系:不同种族的等级制度 249
The Status of Women in Mexico 墨西哥妇女的境况 249
The Borderlands 中间地带 250
SOCIAL POLICY AND GLOBAL INEQUALITY: Universal Human Rights社会政策与全球不平等:普世人权 252


10 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 种族与族群的不平等 258
Minority, Racial, and Ethnic Groups 少数民族、种族和族群 260
Minority Groups少数族群 260
Race 种族 261
Ethnicity 族群性 263
Prejudice and Discrimination 偏见与歧视263
Prejudice 偏见 263
Discriminatory Behavior 歧视行为 265
The Privileges of the Dominant 主导群体的特权 265
Institutional Discrimination 制度性歧视 267
Studying Race and Ethnicity 种族和族群研究 268
Functionalist Perspective 功能论 268
Conflict Perspective 冲突论 269
Interactionist Perspective 互动论 269
Patterns of Intergroup Relations 跨族群关系的模式 270
Amalgamation 融合 271
Assimilation 同化 271
Segregation 隔离 271
Pluralism 多元论 272
Impact of Global Immigration 全球移民的影响 273
Race and Ethnicity in the United States 美国的种族和族群 274
Racial Groups 种族群体 274
Ethnic Groups 族群群体 281
SOCIAL POLICY AND RACIAL AND ETHNIC INEQUALITY: Racial Profiling社会政策与种族和族群不平等:种族歧视性拦检 284


11 Stratification by Gender and Age 性别和年龄的阶层化 290
Social Construction of Gender 性别的社会建构 292
Gender Roles in the United States 性别角色在美国 293
Cross-Cultural Perspective 跨文化观点 296
Explaining Stratification by Gender解释性别阶层化 296
The Functionalist View 功能论观点 297
The Conflict Response 冲突论的反应 297
The Feminist Perspective 女性主义观点 297
The Interactionist Approach 互动论观点 298
Women: The Oppressed Majority妇女:被压迫的多数 299
Sexism and Sex Discrimination 性别主义与性别歧视 299
Sexual Harassment 性骚扰 300
The Status of Women Worldwide世界妇女的地位 300
Women in the Workforce of the United States 美国的职业妇女 302
Aging and Society 人口老龄化与社会 304
Explaining the Aging Process 解释老龄化的过程 305
Functionalist Approach: Disengagement Theory功能论:脱离理论 306
Interactionist Approach: Activity Theory互动论:活动理论 306
The Conflict Approach 冲突论方法 308
Role Transitions throughout the Life Course 生命历程中的角色转换 309
The Sandwich Generation三明治世代 309
Adjusting to Retirement 适应退休后的生活 310
Death and Dying 死亡与临终 312
Age Stratification in the United States 美国的年龄阶层化情形 313
The “Graying of America” 美国的“银灰化” 313
Wealth and Income 财富与收入 314
Ageism 年龄歧视 314
Competition in the Labor Force来自劳动力的竞争 315
SOCIAL POLICY AND GENDER STRATIFICATION: The Battle over Abortion from a Global Perspective社会政策与性别阶层化:从全球化观点看堕胎之战 316

12 The Family and Intimate Relationships 家庭与亲密关系 322
Global View of the Family全球的家庭 324
Composition:What Is the Family? 家庭组成:何谓家庭 324
Kinship Patterns: To Whom Are We Related? 亲属关系:我们和谁有亲属关系? 327
Authority Patterns:Who Rules? 权威形态:谁当家?328
Studying the Family 关于家庭的研究 329
Functionalist View 功能论观点 329
Conflict View 冲突论观点 329
Interactionist View 互动论观点 330
Feminist View 女性主义观点 330
Marriage and Family 婚姻与家庭 331
Courtship and Mate Selection 求婚与择偶 331
Variations in Family Life and Intimate Relationships 多样化的家庭生活与亲密关系 335
Child-Rearing Patterns in Family Life 家庭生活中的儿童养育形态 336
Divorce 离婚 339
Statistical Trends in Divorce 离婚的统计趋势 339
Factors Associated with Divorce 影响离婚的因素 340
Impact of Divorce on Children 离婚对儿童的影响 340
Diverse Lifestyles 多元化的生活方式 340
Cohabitation 同居 341
Remaining Single 保持单身 341
Marriage without Children 无子女的婚姻 343
Lesbian and Gay Relationships 女同性恋和男同性恋的关系 343
SOCIAL POLICY AND THE FAMILY: Gay Marriage社会政策与家庭:同性婚姻 344


13 Religion and Education 宗教和教育 350
Durkheim and the Sociological Approach to Religion涂尔干和社会学研究宗教的方法 352
World Religions 世界宗教 356
Sociological Explanations of Religion 宗教的社会学解释 357
The Integrative Function of Religion 宗教的整合功能 357
Religion and Social Support 宗教与社会支持 359
Religion and Social Change 宗教与社会变迁 360
Religion and Social Control: A Conflict View 宗教与社会控制:冲突论的视角 361
Components of Religion 宗教的组成 361
Belief 信仰 361
Ritual 仪式 362
Experience 经验 363
Religious Organization 宗教组织 364
Ecclesiae 国教 364
Denominations 教派364
Sects 小教派 366
New Religious Movements or Cults 新宗教运动或宗教崇拜 367
Comparing Forms of Religious Organization 宗教组织的比较 368
Case Study: Religion in India 案例研究:印度的宗教 369
The Religious Tapestry in India 印度的宗教装饰 369
Religion and the State in India 印度的宗教与国家 370
Sociological Perspectives on Education 从社会学的观点来论教育 370
Functionalist View 功能论观点 371
Conflict View 冲突论观点 373
Interactionist View 互动论观点 375
Schools as Formal Organizations 学校作为正式组织 377
Bureaucratization of Schools 学校的官僚化 377
Teachers: Employees and Instructors 老师:员工兼指导者 378
Student Subcultures 学生的亚文化 379
Homeschooling 在家教育 380
SOCIAL POLICY AND RELIGION: Religion in the Schools 社会政策与宗教:学校里的宗教 381


14 Government and the Economy 政府与经济 387
Economic Systems 经济系统 389
Capitalism 资本主义 389
Socialism 社会主义 392
The Informal Economy 非正式的经济 393
Power and Authority 权力与权威 393
Power 权力 393
Types of Authority 权威的类型 394
Types of Government 政府的类型 395
Monarchy 君主政体 395
Oligarchy 寡头政治 395
Dictatorship and Totalitarianism 专政和极权主义 395
Democracy 民主政治 396
Political Behavior in the United States 美国的政治行为 396
Participation and Apathy 参与和冷漠 396
Race and Gender in Politics 政治中的种族和性别 397
Models of Power Structure in the United States 美国的权力模式 400
Power Elite Models 权力精英模式 400
Pluralist Model 多元主义模式 401
War and Peace 战争与和平 402
War 战争 402
Peace 和平 403
Terrorism 恐怖主义 404
The Changing Economy 经济的变动 404
The Changing Face of the Workforce 劳动力变动的面貌 404
Deindustrialization 去工业化 405
SOCIAL POLICY AND THE ECONOMY: Global Offshoring社会政策与经济:全球外包 408


15 Population, Communities, and Health 人口、社区与健康 414
Demography: The Study of Population 人口学:人口的研究 416
Malthus’s Thesis and Marx’s Response 马尔萨斯的理论和马克思的响应 417
Studying Population Today 研究当今人口 417
Elements of Demography 人口学的要素 418
World Population Patterns 世界人口模式 419
Demographic Transition 人口转型 419
The Population Explosion 人口爆炸 420
Fertility Patterns in the United States 美国的生育力模式 421
The Baby Boom 婴儿潮 421
Stable Population Growth 稳定人口增长 422
How Have Communities Changed? 社区是如何转变的? 423
Preindustrial Cities 前工业城市 423
Industrial and Postindustrial Cities 工业化城市和后工业城市 424
Urbanization 都市化 425
Functionalist View: Urban Ecology 功能论观点:都市生态学 425
Conflict View: New Urban Sociology 冲突论观点:新城市社会学 427
Types of Communities 社区的类型 429
Central Cities 中心城市 429
Suburbs 郊区 431
Rural Communities 乡村社区 432
Sociological Perspectives on Health and Illness 关于健康和疾病的社会学观点 433
Functionalist Approach 功能论方法 433
Conflict Approach 冲突论方法 435
Interactionist Approach 互动论方法 436
Labeling Approach 标签理论 436
Social Epidemiology and Health 社会流行病和健康 438
Social Class 社会阶级 439
Race and Ethnicity 种族与族群 440
Gender 性别 441
Age 年龄 442
SOCIAL POLICY AND HEALTH: The AIDS Crisis 社会政策与健康:艾滋病危机 442


16 Globalization, the Environment, and Social Change 全球化、环境与社会变迁 449
Social Movements 社会运动 451
Relative Deprivation Approach 相对剥夺理论 452
Resource Mobilization Approach 资源动员理论 452
Gender and Social Movements 性别与社会运动 454
New Social Movements 新社会运动 455
Theories of Social Change 社会变迁理论 455
Evolutionary Theory 进化论 456
Functionalist Theory 功能论 456
Conflict Theory 冲突论 456
Resistance to Social Change 抵抗社会变迁 458
Economic and Cultural Factors 经济与文化因素 458
Resistance to Technology 抗拒科技 459
Global Social Change 全球社会变迁 459
Privacy and Censorship in a Global Village 地球村的隐私和审查 460
Biotechnology and the Gene Pool 生物科技和基因库 460
Social Change and the Environment 社会变迁与环境 463
Environmental Problems: An Overview 环境问题概述 463
Conflict View of Environmental Issues 环境问题的冲突论观点 465
Environmental Justice 环境正义 466
SOCIAL POLICY AND GLOBALIZATION:Transnationals 社会政策与全球化:国际人 467



Glossary 473
References 485

TOP书摘

◆ 自序 ◆
寄语读者:
思考社会学与您的生活

“社会学在我的生活中扮演何种角色?”您在翻开本书或者选修社会学课程前都可能会问这样的问题。您可能还会想到:我会被电视节目影响吗?我什么时候参加过投票选举?谁文过身?谁常在校园里寻欢作乐地饮酒?谁的父母亲离婚了?作弊现象在学校发生过吗?……很可能您会碰到以上的某些或所有的问题。这些问题只不过是本书所描述的日常生活中的几个例子而已,而且也正是社会学可以发挥所长并探究其形态与意义的领域。
社会学涵盖了大多数的社会议题,它试图揭示是什么原因使得工作机会从美国转移到中国等第三世界国家,它评估计算机技术与互联网的普及对社会的影响,以及如何增加或减少社会的不平等。社会学研究的议题还包括移民、游民、导致偏见产生的各种社会力量、双语教育、至今犹存的奴隶制度和各种不同文化步入老年的过程,等等。在“9•11”事件之后,社会学家开始关注恐怖袭击对于社会的影响,例如人们如何面对灾难,或者此类事件对国际社会的影响如何,谣言是如何通过媒体传播的。这些问题引起了我极大的兴趣,但是我发现社会学对它们的解释更加引人注目。社会学的入门课程就像是理想的实验室,它提供给我们机会去了解自己的社会以及我们地球上的邻居。
我生长在芝加哥,当时所居区域正处在族群构成的转型之中,我发现自己渐渐地对周围正在发生的改变感到着迷。同时,我也对人们如何面对这些改变,以及这些改变如何影响我所居住的区域和人们的工作,感到极大的兴趣。刚念大学时,我本来想念法律,将来做个律师。但上了一些社会学的课程之后,我发现自己被社会学家研究的课题所深深吸引。对社会议题的兴趣驱使着我在西北大学学习社会学,并获得社会学学士学位,而且进一步在芝加哥大学获得社会学硕士与博士学位。
我后来成为社会学教授,我曾在大学、成人教育计划、护士学院里教授社会学课程,也曾在伦敦执教,甚至参与监狱中的教化工作,教学经验超过30年。我对教学的热爱最能表现与学生之间的互动上,我发现自己能从学生的身上以及阅读他们所写的报告中获益良多。他们对教材和时事的看法,往往成为我未来课程教材的内容,甚至成为我写作的一部分。我发现“训练”对教导思考和批判性的技巧非常有用,社会学能帮助学生更好地了解他们的生活是如何运行的,以及他们所处的社会与其他国家的文化。本书中特别关注的社会政策部分,能教导学生如何运用社会学的想像力来探讨公共政策中的性骚扰、艾滋病危机、福利改革以及电子时代的隐私权与审查权等议题。
我希望您读过这本书之后,能开始像社会学家一样运用社会学理论与概念去评估人类的互动与社会制度。从第一章介绍“社会学的想象力”开始,本书便一直强调要用社会学的独特方法去检验和质疑社会中最司空见惯的问题。
我对本书读者的忠告是:研读教材并找出社会学与自己的生活及经验的关联,它将使您成为了解人们在群体中如何互动与运作的观察家,它还会使您更深入意识到人们不同的需求与乐趣——或许会使您更能为大众谋取利益,同时也让您对他们的特性有所认知。

理查德•谢弗

◆ 出版后记 ◆

社会学草创之初,奥古斯特•孔德就以实证主义奠定了社会学的思维方式,据说它不同于历史上的神学和形而上学。他相信物理学和化学中严格的科学方法同样适用于人类行为的研究。直到孔德最终以实证主义“人道教”的教主身份自居,并声称我们时代的宗教可以并应当受到实证主义的启迪,人们才从孔德的天真和幼稚中醒悟。现在社会学的学人们可以轻易地嘲笑当初这位最早提出“社会学”的固执哲人,但是很少人会去注意孔德建立社会学学科之初,所寄予这门学科的期望和意义。以实证主义自居的社会学和传统的神学以及形而上学的分离,决不仅仅意味着方法论和认识论上的“巴拉什”式的“断裂”,而是一次思维视觉的转移或者回归,即学问重新回到真实的人类生活本身。
孔德的这份遗产和期望被淹没在人们的唾骂和嘲笑之中,也同样让位于社会学学科定位的焦虑之下。此后的学人不仅耻于承认孔德作为社会学创始人的地位,而且陷入社会学研究领域和研究方法的暧昧泥沼而难以自处。直到爱弥尔•涂尔干提出“社会学方法的规则”以正视听,实证主义的社会学似乎才有了真正的传统。涂尔干当初声称,“社会学就是法国的社会学”,因为实证主义的社会学立基于笛卡儿的理性主义这块大石之上。但是,涂尔干深邃而神秘的思想无法掩饰他的“社会学主义”,以及从中流露出来的“社会学的帝国主义情节”。从学科地位的焦虑到学科的霸权主义似乎只有一墙之隔,或者它们就是一体的两面。
当工业社会的道德沦丧和工具理性大白于天下之时,人们就越发地难以相信实证主义的社会学能与任何宗教温情和道德教育相干,于是人们发展出了社会学的另外一个传统。马克斯•韦伯代表的就是这一传统,韦伯承继新康德主义的哲学思考,主张对于人类自身的研究不能等同于自然的物质世界的研究,应该以“同情式的理解”思索历史和人类的行为方式。他像马克思一样洞察出了这个理性主义时代背后的非理性基因,痛斥任何单一的形式理性主义对于多元世界的宰制,在一定程度上也同样抛弃了单纯追求规律、统一、重复和数量化的实证主义社会学。
涂尔干和韦伯代表的似乎就是两个不同的社会学传统,一直到现在,社会学的学科内部,人们依然热衷于无休止的传统与反传统的争论。甚至在某种意义上,这种争论本身成了社会理论发展的动力源头。社会学的学生们以谙熟吉登斯的“结构化”和布迪厄的“惯习”与“场域”等术语为荣,热衷于争论“行动和结构”,“主观和客体”等等的互动关系。无休止的争论使得人们对于到底什么是社会学这个基本问题,都无法给出一个统一的答案,自卑感十足的社会学学人总是酸楚地争辩说:“这就是社会学的魅力所在!”
局限于理论中心态意义上的强辩毫无疑问不会是社会学的全部,也全然忘记了社会学当初脱离神学和形而上学的根本追求——洞察人类自身行为和生活的秘密。而当理查德•谢弗的这本社会学概论教材出版之后,我们得以再次看到立基于研究热气腾腾的人类生活的社会学。当它的中文版本出版的时候,翻译者创意性地把它命名为《社会学与生活》,我们想也正合作者和读者对于社会学的期待。正如作者和读者们对于社会学的期待那样,本书中大量出现的现代生活意象,包括大量的剧照、海报、漫画、图表以及各种随笔式的专栏都给人们这样的印象:社会学并不遥远,它就在我们的生活之中,或者它就是生活本身。
在中国社会学恢复三十年之后,坊间已经流传着不少的社会学概论教材,其中优劣不等、特色各异。而从国外迻译过来的教材中,又以吉登斯的《社会学》和波普诺的《社会学》最为大多数学生和教师所熟悉,而自从理查德•谢弗先生的《社会学与生活》中文版本出来之后,社会学的概论教材渐成“三足鼎立”之势。出版两年以来,已经是多次重印,佳评如潮。为了回馈广大的社会学爱好者对本书的喜爱,我们推出英文第十版《社会学与生活》。除去增加一些关键词汇的中文注释以外,对于原文不做任何改动和修改,以使读者能读到最原汁原味的《社会学与生活》。
◆ 正文选读 ◆——————————————————————————————————
I am, of course, very different from the people who normally fill America’s least attractive jobs, and in ways that both helped and limited me. Most obviously, I was only visiting a world that others inhabit fulltime, often for most of their lives. With all the real-life assets I’ve built up in middle age—bank account, IRA (The Individual Retirement Account,个人退休账户), health insurance, multiroom home—waiting indulgently in the background, there was no way I was going to “experience poverty” or find out how it “really feels” to be a long-term low-wage worker. My aim here was much more straightforward and objective—just to see whether I could match income to expenses(达到收支平衡), as the truly poor attempt to do every day. . . .
In Portland, Maine, I came closest to achieving a decent fit between income and expenses, but only because I worked seven days a week. Between my two jobs, I was earning approximately $300 a week after taxes and paying $480 a month in rent, or a manageable 40 percent of my earnings. It helped, too, that gas and electricity were included in my rent and that I got two or three free meals each weekend at the nursing home. But I was there at the beginning of the offseason. If I had stayed until June 2000 I would have faced the Blue Haven’s summer rent of $390 a week, which would of course have been out of the question. So to survive year-round, I would have had to save enough, in the months between August 1999 and May 2000, to accumulate the first month’s rent and deposit on an actual apartment. I think I could have done this— saved $800 to $1,000—at least if no car trouble or illness interfered with my budget. I am not sure, however, that I could have maintained the seven-day-a-week regimen month after month or eluded the kinds of injuries that afflicted my fellow workers in the housecleaning business.
In Minneapolis —well, here we are left with a lot of speculation. If I had been able to find an apartment for $400 a month or less, my pay at Wal-Mart—$1,120 a month before taxes—might have been sufficient, although the cost of living in a motel while I searched for such an apartment might have made it impossible for me to save enough for the first month’s rent and deposit. A weekend job, such as the one I almost landed at a supermarket for about $7.75 an hour, would have helped, but I had no guarantee that I could arrange my schedule at Wal-Mart to reliably exclude weekends. If I had taken the job at Menards and the pay was in fact $10 an hour for eleven hours a day, I would have made about $440 a week after taxes—enough to pay for a motel room and still have something left over to save up for the initial costs(头期租金) of an apartment. But were they really offering $10 an hour? And could I have stayed on my feet eleven hours a day, five days a week? So yes, with some different choices, I probably could have survived in Minneapolis. But I’m not going back for a rematch.

(Ehrenreich 2001:6, 197-198) Additional information about this excerpt can be found on the Online Learning Center at www.mhhe.com/schaefer7. ●


In her undercover attempts to survive as a low-wage worker in different cities in the United States, journalist Barbara Ehrenreich revealed patterns of human interaction and used methods of study that foster sociological investigation. This excerpt from her book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America describes how she left a comfortable home and assumed the identity of a divorced, middle-aged housewife with no college degree and little working experience. She set out to get the best-paying job(最优惠工资工作) and the cheapest living quarters she could find, to see whether she could make ends meet. Months later, physically exhausted and demoralized by demeaning work rules, Ehrenreich confirmed what she had suspected before she began: getting by in this country as a low-wage worker is a losing proposition.
Ehrenreich’s study focused on an unequal society, which is a central topic in sociology. Her investigative work, like the work of many other journalists, is informed by sociological research that documents the existence and extent of inequality in our society. Social inequality has a pervasive influence on human interactions and institutions. Certain groups of people control scarce resources, wield power, and receive special treatment. The poster that opens this chapter illustrates another common focus of sociologists, the variations in social behavior from one part of the world to another.
While it might be interesting to know how one individual is affected by the need to make ends meet, or even by the choice to wear a tongue stud or tattoo, sociologists consider how entire groups of people are affected by these kinds of factors, and how society itself might be altered by them. Sociologists, then, are not concerned with what one individual does or does not do, but with what people do as members of a group or in interaction with one another, and what that means for individuals and for society as a whole.
As a field of study, sociology is extremely broad in scope. You will see throughout this book the range of topics sociologists investigate—from suicide to TV viewing habits, from Amish society to global economic patterns, from peer pressure(同辈压力)to genetic engineering(基因工程). Sociology looks at how others influence our behavior; how major social institutions like the government, religion, and the economy affect us; and how we ourselves affect other individuals, groups, and even organizations.
How did sociology develop? In what ways does it differ from other social sciences? This chapter will explore the nature of sociology as both a field of inquiry and an exercise of the “sociological imagination(社会学的想象力).” We’ll look at the discipline as a science and consider its relationship to other social sciences .We’ll meet three pioneering thinkers—?魪mile Durkheim(爱弥尔•涂尔干), Max Weber(马克斯•韦伯), and Karl Marx(卡尔•马克思)—and examine the theoretical perspectives(理论观点)that grew out of their work. We’ll note some of the practical applications for sociological theory and research. Finally, we’ll see how sociology helps us to develop a sociological imagination. For those students interested in exploring career opportunities in sociology, the chapter closes with a special appendix. ●



What Is Sociology?
何谓社会学?
“What has sociology got to do with me or with my life?” As a student, you might well have asked this question when you signed up for your introductory sociology course. To answer it, consider these points: Are you influenced by what you see on television? Do you use the Internet? Did you vote in the last election? Are you familiar with binge drinking on campus? Do you use alternative medicine? These are just a few of the everyday life situations described in this book that sociology can shed light on. But as the opening excerpt indicates, sociology also looks at large social issues. We use sociology to investigate why thousands of jobs have moved from the United States to developing nations, what social forces promote prejudice, what leads someone to join a social movement and work for social change, how access to computer technology can reduce social inequality, and why relationships between men and women in Seattle differ from those in Singapore.
Sociology(社会学)is, very simply, the scientific study of social behavior and human groups. It focuses on social relationships; how those relationships influence people’s behavior; and how societies, the sum total of those relationships, develop and change.

The Sociological Imagination
社会学的想象力
In attempting to understand social behavior, sociologists rely on an unusual type of creative thinking. A leading sociologist, C. Wright Mills(赖特•米尔斯), described such thinking as the sociological imagination—an awareness of the relationship between an individual and the wider society, both today and in the past. This awareness allows all of us (not just sociologists) to comprehend the links between our immediate, personal social settings and the remote, impersonal social world that surrounds and helps to shape us. Barbara Ehrenreich certainly used a sociological imagination when she studied low-wage workers (Mills [1959] 2000a).
A key element in the sociological imagination is the ability to view one’s own society as an outsider would, rather than only from the perspective of personal experiences and cultural biases. Consider something as simple as sporting events. On college campuses in the United States, thousands of students cheer well-trained football players. In Bali(巴厘岛), Indonesia, dozens of spectators gather around a ring to cheer on well-trained roosters engaged in cockfights(斗鸡). In both instances, the spectators debate the merits of their favorites and bet on the outcome of the events. Yet what is considered a normal sporting event in one part of the world is considered unusual in another part.
The sociological imagination allows us to go beyond personal experiences and observations to understand broader public issues(公共议题). Divorce, for example, is unquestionably a personal hardship for a husband and wife who split apart. However, C. Wright Mills advocated using the sociological imagination to view divorce not simply as an individual’s personal problem but rather as a societal concern. Using this perspective, we can see that an increase in the divorce rate actually redefines a major social institution(社会机制)—the family. Today’s households frequently include stepparents(继父母) and half-siblings(同父异母或同母异父的兄弟姐妹)whose parents have divorced and remarried. Through the complexities of the blended family, this private concern becomes a public issue that affects schools, government agencies, businesses, and religious institutions.
The sociological imagination is an empowering tool. It allows us to look beyond a limited understanding of human behavior to see the world and its people in a new way and through a broader lens than we might otherwise use. It may be as simple as understanding why a roommate prefers country music to hip-hop(嘻哈音乐), or it may open up a whole different way of understanding other populations in the world. For example, in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, many citizens wanted to understand how Muslims throughout the world perceived their country, and why. From time to time this textbook will offer you the chance to exercise your own sociological imagination in a variety of situations. We’ll begin with one that may be close to home for you.

Sociology and the Social Sciences
社会学与社会科学
Is sociology a science? The term science(科学)refers to the body of knowledge obtained by methods based on systematic observation. Just like other scientific disciplines, sociology involves the organized, systematic study of phenomena (in this case, human behavior) in order to enhance understanding. All scientists, whether studying mushrooms or murderers, attempt to collect precise information through methods of study that are as objective as possible. They rely on careful recording of observations and accumulation of data.
Of course, there is a great difference between sociology and physics, between psychology(心理学)and astronomy(天文学). For this reason, the sciences are commonly divided into natural and social sciences. Natural science(自然科学)is the study of the physical features of nature and the ways in which they interact and change. Astronomy, biology, chemistry, geology(地质学), and physics are all natural sciences. Social science(社会科学)is the study of the social features of humans and the ways in which they interact and change. The social sciences include sociology, anthropology(人类学), economics, history, psychology, and political science.
These social science disciplines have a common focus on the social behavior of people, yet each has a particular orientation. Anthropologists usually study past cultures and preindustrial societies(前工业社会)that continue today, as well as the origins of humans. Economists explore the ways in which people produce and exchange goods and services, along with money and other resources. Historians are concerned with the peoples and events of the past and their significance for us today. Political scientists study international relations, the workings of government, and the exercise of power and authority. Psychologists investigate personality and individual behavior. So what do sociologists focus on? They study the influence that society has on people’s attitudes and behavior and the ways in which people interact and shape society. Because humans are social animals, sociologists examine our social relationships with others scientifically.
Let’s consider how different social sciences would study the impact of Hurricane Katrina(卡特里娜飓风), which ravaged the Gulf Coast(墨西哥湾)of the United States in 2005. Historians would compare the damage done by natural disasters in the 20th century to that caused by Katrina. Economists would conduct research on the economic impact of the damage, not just in the Southeast but throughout the nation and the world. Psychologists would study individual cases to assess the emotional stress of the traumatic event. And political scientists would study the stances taken by different elected officials, along with their implications for the government’s response to the disaster.
What approach would sociologists take? They might look at Katrina’s impact on different communities, as well as on different social classes. Some sociologists have undertaken neighborhood and community studies, to determine how to maintain the integrity of storm-struck neighborhoods during the rebuilding phase. Researchers have focused in particular on Katrina’s impact on marginalized groups, from the inner-city poor in New Orleans to residents of rural American Indian reservations (Laska 2005). The devastating social impact of the storm did not surprise sociologists; as Figure 1-1 (page 8) shows, the disaster area was among the poorest in the United States. In terms of family income, for example, New Orleans ranked 63rd (7th lowest) among the nation’s 70 largest cities. When the storm left tens of thousands of Gulf Coast families homeless and unemployed, most had no savings to fall back on—no way to pay for a hotel room or tide themselves over until the next paycheck. For a sociological treatment of another natural disaster, see Box 1-2(page 23) on the 2004 tsunami.
Sociologists have a long history of advising government agencies on how to respond to disasters. Certainly the poverty of the Gulf Coast region complicated the huge challenge of evacuation. With Katrina bearing down on the Gulf Coast, thousands of poor inner-city residents had no automobiles or other available means of escaping the storm. Added to that difficulty was the high incidence of disability in the area. New Orleans ranked 2nd among the nation’s 70 largest cities in the proportion of people over age 65 who are disabled—56 percent. Moving wheelchair-bound residents to safety requires specially equipped vehicles, to say nothing of handicap-accessible accommodations in public shelters. Clearly, officials must consider these factors in developing evacuation plans (Bureau of the Census 2005f).
Sociologists put their sociological imaginations to work in a variety of areas—including aging(人口老龄化), the family, human ecology, and religion. Throughout this textbook, you will see how sociologists develop theories and conduct research to study and better understand societies. And you will be encouraged to use your own sociological imagination to examine the United States (and other societies) from the viewpoint of a respectful but questioning outsider.

Sociology and Common Sense
社会学与常识
Sociology focuses on the study of human behavior. Yet we all have experience with human behavior and at least some knowledge of it. All of us might well have theories about why people become homeless, for example. Our theories and opinions typically come from “common sense”—that is, from our experiences and conversations, from what we read, from what we see on television, and so forth.
In our daily lives, we rely on common sense to get us through many unfamiliar situations. However, this commonsense knowledge, while sometimes accurate, is not always reliable, because it rests on commonly held beliefs rather than on systematic analysis of facts. It was once considered common sense to accept that the earth was flat—a view rightly questioned by Pythagoras (毕达哥拉斯)and Aristotle (亚里士多德). Incorrect commonsense notions are not just a part of the distant past; they remain with us today.
Contrary to the saying “The love of money is the root of all evil,” for example, sociologists have found that in reality, affluence brings not only nicer cars and longer vacations but also better health and a significantly reduced exposure to pollution of all types. Another commonsense belief, “Love knows no reason,” does not stand up to sociological research on courtship and marriage. The choice of a lifetime partner is generally limited by societal expectations and confined within boundaries defined by age, money, education, ethnicity, religion, and even height. Cupid’s arrow flies only in certain directions (Ruane and Cerulo 2004).
In the United States today, “common sense” tells us that young people flock to concerts featuring Christian rock(基督教摇滚乐) because religion is becoming more important to them. However, this particular “commonsense” notion—like the notion that the earth is flat—is untrue, and is not supported by sociological research. Through 2005, annual surveys of first-year college students show a decline in the percentage who attend religious services even occasionally. Increasing numbers of college students claim to have no religious preference. The trend encompasses not just organized religion but other forms of spirituality as well. Fewer students pray or meditate today than in the past, and fewer consider their level of spirituality to be very high (Sax et al. 2005).
Similarly, disasters do not generally produce panic. In the aftermath of disasters such as 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, most people respond responsibly, even heroically, by following the authorities’ directions and reaching out to those in need. Some emergency responses go more smoothly than others. On September 11, 2001, New York City’s command and control structures were re-created quickly, but in 2005, amid Katrina’s much vaster destruction, social organizations from the local to the federal level struggled to communicate and coordinate. Regardless of the type of catastrophe or its location, however, decision making becomes more centralized in times of disaster.
Like other social scientists, sociologists do not accept something as a fact because “everyone knows it.” Instead, each piece of information must be tested and recorded, then analyzed in relationship to other data. Sociologists rely on scientific studies in order to describe and understand a social environment. At times, the findings of sociologists may seem like common sense, because they deal with familiar facets of everyday life. The difference is that such findings have been tested by researchers. Common sense now tells us that the earth is round. But this particular commonsense notion is based on centuries of scientific work that began with the breakthroughs made by Pythagoras and Aristotle.


What Is Sociological
Theory?
何谓社会学理论?
Why do people commit suicide? One traditional commonsense answer is that people inherit the desire to kill themselves. Another view is that sunspots(太阳黑子) drive people to take their own lives. These explanations may not seem especially convincing to contemporary researchers, but they represent beliefs widely held as recently as 1900.
Sociologists are not particularly interested in why any one individual commits suicide; they are more concerned with identifying the social forces that systematically cause some people to take their own lives. In order to undertake this research, sociologists develop a theory that offers a general explanation of suicidal behavior.
We can think of theories as attempts to explain events, forces, materials, ideas, or behavior in a comprehensive manner. In sociology, a theory(理论)is a set of statements that seeks to explain problems, actions, or behavior. An effective theory may have both explanatory and predictive power. That is, it can help us to see the relationships among seemingly isolated phenomena(看似独立的现象), as well as to understand how one type of change in an environment leads to other changes.
The World Health Organization (世界卫生组织,2002) estimated that a total of 815,000 people committed suicide in 2000.More than a hundred years earlier, a sociologist tried to look at suicide data scientifically. ?魪mile Durkheim (爱弥儿•涂尔干[1897] 1951) developed a highly original theory about the relationship between suicide and social factors. Durkheim was primarily concerned not with the personalities of individual(人格特质) suicide victims, but rather with suicide rates and how they varied from country to country. As a result, when he looked at the number of reported suicides in France, England, and Denmark in 1869, he also noted the total population of each country in order to determine the rate of suicide in each nation. He found that whereas England had only 67 reported suicides per million inhabitants, France had 135 per million and Denmark(丹麦) had 277 per million. The question then became: “Why did Denmark have a comparatively high rate of reported suicide?”
Durkheim went much deeper into his investigation of suicide rates. The result was his landmark work Suicide(《自杀论》), published in 1897. Durkheim refused to accept unproved explanations regarding suicide, including the beliefs that cosmic forces or inherited tendencies caused such deaths. Instead, he focused on social factors, such as the cohesiveness or lack of cohesiveness(凝聚力) of religious, social, and occupational groups.
Durkheim’s research suggested that suicide, while a solitary act, is related to group life. Protestants(新教徒) had much higher suicide rates than Catholics(天主教徒); the unmarried had much higher rates than married people; and soldiers were more likely to take their lives than civilians. In addition, there seemed to be higher rates of suicide in times of peace than in times of war and revolution, and in times of economic instability and recession rather than in times of prosperity. Durkheim concluded that the suicide rates of a society reflected the extent to which people were or were not integrated into the group life of the society.
?魪mile Durkheim, like many other social scientists, developed a theory to explain how individual behavior can be understood within a social context. He pointed out the influence of groups and societal forces on what had always been viewed as a highly personal act. Clearly, Durkheim offered a more scientific explanation for the causes of suicide than that of sunspots or inherited tendencies. His theory has predictive power, since it suggests that suicide rates will rise or fall in conjunction with certain social and economic changes.
Of course, a theory — even the best of theories — is not a final statement about human behavior. Durkheim’s theory of suicide is no exception. Sociologists continue to examine factors that contribute to differences in suicide rates around the world and to a particular society’s rate of suicide. For example, although the overall rate of suicide in New Zealand is only marginally higher than the rate in the United States, the suicide rate among young people is 41 percent higher in New Zealand. Sociologists and psychiatrists from that country suggest that their remote, sparsely populated society maintains exaggerated standards of masculinity(男子气概) that are especially difficult for young males. Gay adolescents who fail to conform to their peers’ preference for sports are particularly vulnerable to suicide (Shenon 1995).









The Development of Sociology
社会学的发展
People have always been curious about sociological matters— how we get along with others, what we do for a living, whom we select as our leaders. Philosophers and religious authorities of ancient and medieval societies made countless observations about human behavior. They did not test or verify those observations scientifically; nevertheless, their observations often became the foundation for moral codes(道德规约). Several of the early social philosophers predicted that a systematic study of human behavior would emerge one day. Beginning in the 19th century, European theorists made pioneering contributions to the development of a science of human behavior.

Early Thinkers
早期思想家
Auguste Comte奥古斯特•孔德 The 19th century was an unsettling time in France. The French monarchy(君主立宪制) had been deposed in the revolution of 1789, and Napoleon (拿破仑) had suffered defeat in his effort to conquer Europe. Amid this chaos, philosophers considered how society might be improved. Auguste Comte (1798-1857), credited with being the most influential of the philosophers of the early 1800s, believed that a theoretical science of society and a systematic investigation of behavior were needed to improve society. He coined the term sociology(社会学) to apply to the science of human behavior.
Writing in the 1800s, Comte feared that the excesses of the French Revolution had permanently impaired France’s stability. Yet he hoped that the systematic study of social behavior would eventually lead to more rational human interactions. In Comte’s hierarchy of the sciences, sociology was at the top. He called it the “queen(女皇),” and its practitioners “scientist-priests(科学传教士).” This French theorist did not simply give sociology its name; he presented a rather ambitious challenge to the fledgling discipline.

Harriet Martineau哈丽雅特•马蒂诺 Scholars learned of Comte’s works largely through translations by the English sociologist Harriet Martineau (1802–1876). But Martineau was a pathbreaker in her own right. She offered insightful observations of the customs and social practices of both her native Britain and the United States. Martineau’s book Society in America(《美国社会》)([1837] 1962) examined religion, politics, child rearing, and immigration in the young nation. It gave special attention to social class distinctions(社会阶级区分)and to such factors as gender and race. Martineau ([1838] 1989) also wrote the first book on sociological methods.
Martineau’s writings emphasized the impact that the economy, law, trade, health, and population could have on social problems. She spoke out in favor of the rights of women, the emancipation of slaves, and religious tolerance. Later in life, deafness did not keep her from being an activist. In Martineau’s ([1837] 1962) view, intellectuals and scholars should not simply offer observations of social conditions; they should act on their convictions in a manner that will benefit society. That is why Martineau conducted research on the nature of female employment and pointed to the need for further investigation of the issue (Deegan 2003; M. Hill and Hoecker-Drysdale 2001).

Herbert Spencer 赫伯特•斯宾塞 Another important early contributor to the discipline of sociology was Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). A relatively prosperous Victorian Englishman, Spencer (unlike Martineau) did not feel compelled to correct or improve society; instead, he merely hoped to understand it better. Drawing on Charles Darwin’s(查尔斯•达尔文)study On the Origin of Species(《物种起源》), Spencer applied the concept of evolution of the species to societies in order to explain how they change, or evolve, over time. Similarly, he adapted Darwin’s evolutionary view (进化论)of the “survival of the fittest”(适者生存)by arguing that it is “natural” that some people are rich while others are poor.
Spencer’s approach to societal change was extremely popular in his own lifetime. Unlike Comte, Spencer suggested that since societies are bound to change eventually, one need not be highly critical of present social arrangements or work actively for social change. This viewpoint appealed to many influential people in England and the United States who had a vested interest in the status quo and were suspicious of social thinkers who endorsed change.

?魪mile Durkheim
爱弥尔•涂尔干
?魪mile Durkheim made many pioneering contributions to sociology, including his important theoretical work on suicide(自杀). The son of a rabbi(拉比,犹太教教士), Durkheim (1858–1917) was educated in both France and Germany. He established an impressive academic reputation and was appointed one of the first professors of sociology in France. Above all, Durkheim will be remembered for his insistence that behavior must be understood within a larger social context, not just in individualistic terms.
As one example of this emphasis, Durkheim ([1912] 2001) developed a fundamental thesis to help explain all forms of society. Through intensive study of the Arunta, an Australian tribe, he focused on the functions that religion performed and underscored the role of group life in defining what we consider to be religious. Durkheim concluded that like other forms of group behavior, religion reinforces a group’s solidarity(团结).
Another of Durkheim’s main interests was the consequences of work in modern societies. In his view, the growing division of labor(劳动分工) in industrial societies, as workers became much more specialized in their tasks, led to what he called anomie. Anomie(失范) refers to the loss of direction felt in a society when social control of individual behavior has become ineffective. The state of anomie occurs when people have lost their sense of purpose or direction, often during a time of profound social change(社会变迁). In a period of anomie, people are so confused and unable to cope with the new social environment that they may resort to taking their own lives.
Durkheim was concerned about the dangers that alienation(疏离), loneliness, and isolation might pose for modern industrial societies. He shared Comte’s belief that sociology should provide direction for social change. As a result, he advocated the creation of new social groups—mediators(调解员)between the individual’s family and the state—which would provide a sense of belonging for members of huge, impersonal societies. Unions(工会)would be an example of such groups.
Like many other sociologists, Durkheim did not limit his interests to one aspect of social behavior. Later in this book we will consider his thinking on crime and punishment, religion, and the workplace. Few sociologists have had such a dramatic impact on so many different areas within the discipline.

Max Weber
马克斯•韦伯
Another important early theorist was Max Weber (pronounced “VAY-ber”). Born in Germany, Weber (1864–1920) studied legal and economic history, but gradually developed an interest in sociology. Eventually, he became a professor at various German universities. Weber taught his students that they should employ verstehen (pronounced “fair-SHTAY-en”,理解,这个德国字的意思是“了解”或“洞察”), the German word for “understanding” or “insight,” in their intellectual work. He pointed out that we cannot analyze our social behavior by the same type of objective criteria (客观标准)we use to measure weight or temperature. To fully comprehend behavior, we must learn the subjective meanings (主观意图)people attach to their actions—how they themselves view and explain their behavior.
For example, suppose that a sociologist was studying the social ranking of individuals in a fraternity(兄弟会,行会). Weber would expect the researcher to employ verstehen to determine the significance of the fraternity’s social hierarchy(社会阶层)for its members. The researcher might examine the effects of athleticism or grades or social skills or seniority on standing within the fraternity. He or she would seek to learn how the fraternity members relate to other members of higher or lower status. While investigating these questions, the researcher would take into account people’s emotions, thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes (L. Coser 1977).
We also owe credit to Weber for a key conceptual tool: the ideal type. An ideal type (理想型)is a construct or model for evaluating specific cases. In his own works, Weber identified various characteristics of bureaucracy(官僚制度)as an ideal type (discussed in detail in Chapter 5). In presenting this model of bureaucracy, Weber was not describing any particular business, nor was he using the term ideal in a way that suggested a positive evaluation. Instead, his purpose was to provide a useful standard for measuring how bureaucratic an actual organization is (Gerth and Mills 1958). Later in this textbook, we will use the concept of ideal type to study the family, religion, authority, and economic systems, as well as to analyze bureaucracy.
Although their professional careers coincided, ?魪mile Durkheim and Max Weber never met and probably were unaware of each other’s existence, let alone ideas. Such was not true of the work of Karl Marx. Durkheim’s thinking about the impact of the division of labor in industrial societies was related to Marx’s writings, while Weber’s concern for a value-free, objective sociology was a direct response to Marx’s deeply held convictions(信念). Thus, it is not surprising that Karl Marx is viewed as a major figure in the development of sociology, as well as several other social sciences (see Figure 1-2, page 12).

Karl Marx
卡尔•马克思
Karl Marx (1818–1883) shared with Durkheim and Weber a dual interest in abstract philosophical issues and the concrete reality of everyday life. Unlike the others, Marx was so critical of existing institutions that a conventional academic career was impossible. He spent most of his life in exile from his native Germany.
Marx’s personal life was a difficult struggle. When a paper he had written was suppressed, he fled to France. In Paris, he met Friedrich Engels (弗里德里希•恩格斯,1820–1895), with whom he formed a lifelong friendship. They lived at a time when European and North American economic life was increasingly dominated by the factory rather than the farm.
While in London in 1847, Marx and Engels attended secret meetings of an illegal coalition of labor unions known as the Communist League(共产主义联盟). The following year they prepared a platform called The Communist Manifesto(《共产党宣言》), in which they argued that the masses of people with no resources other than their labor (whom they referred to as the proletariat[无产阶级]) should unite to fight for the overthrow of capitalist societies. In the words of Marx and Engels:
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. . . . The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES UNITE ! (L. Feuer 1989:7, 41)
After completing The Communist Manifesto, Marx returned to Germany, only to be expelled. He then moved to England, where he continued to write books and essays. Marx lived there in extreme poverty. He pawned most of his possessions, and several of his children died of malnutrition and disease. Marx clearly was an outsider in British society, a fact that may well have colored his view of Western cultures.
In Marx’s analysis, society was fundamentally divided between two classes that clashed in pursuit of their own interests. When he examined the industrial societies of his time, such as Germany, England, and the United States, he saw the factory as the center of conflict between the exploiters (the owners of the means of production,剥削者) and the exploited (the workers,被剥削者). Marx viewed these relationships in systematic terms; that is, he believed that a system of economic, social, and political relationships maintained the power and dominance of the owners over the workers. Consequently, Marx and Engels argued that the working class should overthrow(推翻)the existing class system. Marx’s influence on contemporary thinking has been dramatic. His writings inspired those who would later lead communist revolutions(共产主义革命) in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, and elsewhere.
Even apart from the political revolutions that his work fostered, Marx’s significance is profound. Marx emphasized the group identifications and associations(群体归属与结合)that influence an individual’s place in society. This area of study is the major focus of contemporary sociology. Throughout this textbook, we will consider how membership in a particular gender classification, age group, racial group, or economic class affects a person’s attitudes and behavior. In an important sense, we can trace this way of understanding society back to the pioneering work of Karl Marx.

Modern Developments
当代发展
Sociology today builds on the firm foundation developed by ?魪mile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Karl Marx. However, the field certainly has not remained stagnant over the last hundred years. While Europeans have continued to make contributions to the discipline, sociologists from throughout the world and especially the United States have advanced sociological theory and research. Their new insights have helped us to better understand the workings of society.

Charles Horton Cooley查尔斯•霍顿•库利 Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929) was typical of the sociologists who came to prominence in the early 1900s. Born in Ann Arbor, Michigan, Cooley received his graduate training in economics but later became a sociology professor at the University of Michigan. Like other early sociologists, he had become interested in this “new” discipline while pursuing a related area of study.
Cooley shared the desire of Durkheim, Weber, and Marx to learn more about society. But to do so effectively, he preferred to use the sociological perspective to look first at smaller units— intimate, face-to-face groups such as families, gangs, and friendship networks. He saw these groups as the seedbeds(发源地)of society, in the sense that they shape people’s ideals, beliefs, values, and social nature. Cooley’s work increased our understanding of groups of relatively small size.

Jane Addams简•亚当斯 In the early 1900s, many leading sociologists in the United States saw themselves as social reformers dedicated to systematically studying and then improving a corrupt society. They were genuinely concerned about the lives of immigrants(移民)in the nation’s growing cities, whether those immigrants came from Europe or from the rural American South. Early female sociologists, in particular, often took active roles in poor urban areas as leaders of community centers known as settlement houses(街坊会馆).For example, Jane Addams (1860–1935), a member of the American Sociological Society, cofounded the famous Chicago settlement, Hull House(赫尔会馆).
Addams and other pioneering female sociologists commonly combined intellectual inquiry, social service work, and political activism—all with the goal of assisting the underprivileged (弱势群体)and creating a more egalitarian society(公平社会). For example, working with the Black journalist and educator Ida Wells-Barnett(艾达•韦尔斯-巴尼特), Addams successfully prevented racial segregation(种族隔离)in the Chicago public schools. Addams’s efforts to establish a juvenile court system(青少年法庭制度)and a women’s trade union(女性工会)reveal the practical focus of her work (Addams 1910, 1930; Deegan 1991; Lengermann and Niebrugge-Brantley 1998).
By the middle of the 20th century, however, the focus of the discipline had shifted. Sociologists for the most part restricted themselves to theorizing and gathering information; the aim of transforming society was left to social workers and activists. This shift away from social reform was accompanied by a growing commitment to scientific methods of research and to value-free interpretation of data. Not all sociologists were happy with this emphasis. A new organization, the Society for the Study of Social Problems(社会问题研究协会), was created in 1950 to deal more directly with social inequality and other social problems.

Robert Merton罗伯特•默顿  Sociologist Robert Merton (1910–2003) made an important contribution to the discipline by successfully combining theory and research. Born to Slavic (斯拉夫)immigrant parents in Philadelphia, Merton won a scholarship to Temple University. He continued his studies at Harvard, where he acquired his lifelong interest in sociology. Merton’s teaching career was based at Columbia University.
Merton (1968) produced a theory that is one of the most frequently cited explanations of deviant behavior(越轨行为). He noted different ways in which people attempt to achieve success in life. In his view, some may deviate from the socially approved goal of accumulating material goods or the socially accepted means of achieving that goal. For example, in Merton’s classification scheme, “innovators”(“创新者”)are people who accept the goal of pursuing material wealth but use illegal means to do so, including robbery(抢劫), burglary(盗窃), and extortion(勒索). Merton based his explanation of crime on individual behavior that has been influenced by society’s approved goals and means, yet it has wider applications. It helps to account for the high crime rates among the nation’s poor, who may see no hope of advancing themselves through traditional roads to success. Chapter 7 discusses Merton’s theory in greater detail.
Merton also emphasized that sociology should strive to bring together the “macro-level” (“宏观层次”)and “micro-level”(“微观层次”)approaches to the study of society. Macrosociology(宏观社会学)concentrates on large-scale phenomena or entire civilizations. ?魪mile Durkheim’s crosscultural study of suicide is an example of macro-level research. More recently, macrosociologists have examined international crime rates (see Chapter 7), the stereotype(刻板印象) of Asian Americans as a “model minority”(模范少数族群)(see Chapter 10), and the population patterns of developing countries (see Chapter 15). In contrast, microsociology(微观社会学)stresses the study of small groups, often through experimental means. Sociological research on the micro level has included studies of how divorced men and women disengage from significant social roles(社会角色)(see Chapter 5); of how conformity(从众行为)can influence the expression of prejudiced attitudes (see Chapter 7); and of how a teacher’s expectations can affect a student’s academic performance (see Chapter 13).
Today sociology reflects the diverse contributions of earlier theorists. As sociologists approach such topics as divorce, drug addiction, and religious cults, they can draw on the theoretical insights of the discipline’s pioneers. A careful reader can hear Comte, Durkheim, Weber, Marx, Cooley, Addams, and many others speaking through the pages of current research. Sociology has also broadened beyond the intellectual confines of North America and Europe. Contributions to the discipline now come from sociologists studying and researching human behavior in other parts of the world. This geographical expansion can be seen in the current list of sections of the American Sociological Association (see Table 1-1,page 15), which reflects the wide range of interests common to sociologists today. In describing the work of these sociologists, it is helpful to examine a number of influential theoretical approaches(理论途径)(also known as perspectives [观点]).


Major Theoretical Perspectives 主要的理论观点
Sociologists view society in different ways. Some see the world basically as a stable and ongoing entity. They are impressed with the endurance of the family, organized religion, and other social institutions. Other sociologists see society as composed of many groups in conflict, competing for scarce resources. To still other sociologists, the most fascinating aspects of the social world are the everyday, routine interactions(日常互动) among individuals that we sometimes take for granted. These three views, the ones most widely used by sociologists, are the functionalist, conflict, and interactionist perspectives. Together, these approaches will provide an introductory look at the discipline.

Functionalist Perspective
功能论
Think of society as a living organism in which each part of the organism contributes to its survival. This view is the functionalist perspective, which emphasizes the way in which the parts of a society are structured to maintain its stability.
Talcott Parsons (塔尔科特•帕森斯,1902–1979), a Harvard University sociologist, was a key figure in the development of functionalist theory. Parsons was greatly influenced by the work of ?魪mile Durkheim, Max Weber, and other European sociologists. For over four decades, he dominated sociology in the United States with his advocacy of functionalism(功能主义). Parsons saw any society as a vast network of connected parts, each of which helps to maintain the system as a whole. His functionalist approach holds that if an aspect of social life does not contribute to a society’s stability or survival—if it does not serve some identifiably useful function or promote value consensus(价值观的共识) among members of a society—it will not be passed on from one generation to the next.
Let’s examine an example of the functionalist perspective. Many Americans have difficulty understanding the Hindu prohibition against slaughtering cows (specifically, zebu)(印度禁止屠杀牛,尤其是瘤牛). Cattle browse unhindered through Indian street markets, helping themselves to oranges and mangoes while people bargain for the little food they can afford. What explains this devotion to the cow in the face of human deprivation—a devotion that appears to be dysfunctional?
The simple explanation is that cow worship is highly functional in Indian society, according to economists, agronomists, and social scientists who have studied the matter. Cows perform two essential tasks: plowing the fields and producing milk. If eating their meat were permitted, hungry families might be tempted to slaughter their cows for immediate consumption, leaving themselves without a means of cultivation(耕作工具). Cows also produce dung(牛粪), which doubles as a fertilizer and a fuel for cooking. Finally, cow meat sustains the neediest group in society, the untouchables, or dalit(达利特,不可接触者,即印度贱民), who sometimes resort to eating beef in secrecy. If eating beef were socially acceptable, higher status Indians would no doubt bid up its price, placing it beyond the reach of the hungriest.
Manifest and Latent Functions显性功能与隐性功能 A college catalog typically states various functions of the institution. It may inform you, for example, that the university intends to “offer each student a broad education in classical and contemporary thought, in the humanities, in the sciences, and in the arts.” However, it would be quite a surprise to find a catalog that declared, “This university was founded in 1895 to assist people in finding a marriage partner.” No college catalog will declare this as the purpose of the university. Yet societal institutions serve many functions, some of them quite subtle. The university, in fact, does facilitate mate selection.
Robert Merton (1968) made an important distinction between manifest and latent functions. Manifest functions(显性功能)of institutions are open, stated, conscious functions. They involve the intended, recognized consequences of an aspect of society, such as the university’s role in certifying academic competence and excellence. In contrast, latent functions(隐性功能)are unconscious or unintended functions that may reflect hidden purposes of an institution. One latent function of universities is to hold down unemployment. Another is to serve as a meeting ground for people seeking marital partners.

Dysfunctions反功能  Functionalists acknowledge that not all parts of a society contribute to its stability all the time. A dysfunction refers to an element or process of a society that may actually disrupt the social system or reduce its stability.
We view many dysfunctional behavior patterns, such as homicide(凶杀), as undesirable. Yet we should not automatically interpret them in this way. The evaluation of a dysfunction depends on one’s own values, or as the saying goes, on “where you sit.” For example, the official view in prisons in the United States is that inmate gangs(监狱中的帮派)should be eradicated because they are dysfunctional to smooth operations. Yet some guards have actually come to view prison gangs as a functional part of their jobs. The danger posed by gangs creates a “threat to security,” requiring increased surveillance(监管)and more overtime work for guards, as well as requests for special staffing to address gang problems (G. Scott 2001).

Conflict Perspective
冲突论
Where functionalists see stability and consensus(稳定与共识), conflict sociologists see a social world in continual struggle. The conflict perspective assumes that social behavior is best understood in terms of conflict or tension between competing groups. Such conflict need not be violent; it can take the form of labor negotiations(劳资协商), party politics, competition between religious groups for new members, or disputes over the federal budget(联邦预算争议).
Throughout most of the 1900s, the functionalist perspective had the upper hand (占上风)in sociology in the United States. However, the conflict approach has become increasingly persuasive since the late 1960s. The widespread social unrest resulting from battles over civil rights(争取公民权运动), bitter divisions over the war in Vietnam, the rise of the feminist and gay liberation movements(女性主义与同性恋解放运动), the Watergate political scandal(水门事件), urban riots(都市暴动), and confrontations at abortion (堕胎争论)clinics have offered support for the conflict approach—the view that our social world is characterized by continual struggle between competing groups. Currently, the discipline of sociology accepts conflict theory as one valid way to gain insight into a society.

The Marxist View 马克思的观点 As we saw earlier, Karl Marx viewed struggle between social classes as inevitable(不可避免的), given the exploitation of workers under capitalism. Expanding on Marx’s work, sociologists and other social scientists have come to see conflict not merely as a class phenomenon but as a part of everyday life in all societies. In studying any culture, organization, or social group, sociologists want to know who benefits, who suffers, and who dominates at the expense of others. They are concerned with the conflicts between women and men, parents and children, cities and suburbs, Whites and Blacks, to name only a few. Conflict theorists are interested in how society’s institutions—including the family, government, religion, education, and the media— may help to maintain the privileges of some groups and keep others in a subservient(被支配的)position. Their emphasis on social change(社会变迁)and the redistribution of resources(资源重组)makes conflict theorists more “radical”(“极端”)and “activist”(“激进”)than functionalists (Dahrendorf 1959).

An African American View: W. E. B. Du Bois 种族观点:杜波依斯 One important contribution of conflict theory is that it has encouraged sociologists to view society through the eyes of those segments of the population that rarely influence decision making. Some early Black sociologists, including W. E. B. Du Bois (1868–1963), conducted research that they hoped would assist the struggle for a racially egalitarian society(种族平等的社会). Du Bois believed that knowledge was essential in combating prejudice and achieving tolerance and justice. Sociology, he contended, had to draw on scientific principles to study social problems such as those experienced by Blacks in the United States. Du Bois made a major contribution to sociology through his in-depth studies of urban life, both White and Black.
Du Bois had little patience with theorists such as Herbert Spencer, who seemed content with the status quo. He advocated basic research on the lives of Blacks, to separate opinion from fact. In this way he documented their relatively low status in Philadelphia(费城)and Atlanta(亚特兰大). Du Bois believed that the granting of full political rights to Blacks was essential to their social and economic progress in the United States. Because many of his ideas challenged the status quo, he did not find a receptive audience within either the government or the academic world. As a result, Du Bois became increasingly involved with organizations whose members questioned the established social order. He helped to found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People(全国有色人种协进会), better known as the NAACP (Wortham 2005).
The addition of diverse views within sociology in recent years has led to some valuable research, especially on African Americans. For many years, African Americans were understandably wary of participating in medical research studies, because those studies had been used for such purposes as justifying slavery or determining the impact of untreated syphilis. Now, however, African American sociologists and other social scientists are working to involve Blacks in useful ethnic medical research on diabetes(糖尿病)and sickle cell anemia(镰状细胞贫血症), two disorders that strike Black populations especially hard (A. Young and Deskins 2001).

The Feminist View 女性主义观点 Sociologists began embracing the feminist perspective only in the 1970s, although it has a long tradition in many other disciplines. The feminist view sees inequity in gender(性别不平等)as central to all behavior and organization. Because it clearly focuses on one aspect of inequality, it is often allied with the conflict perspective. Proponents of the feminist perspective tend to focus on the macro level, just as conflict theorists do. Drawing on the work of Marx and Engels, contemporary feminist theorists often view women’s subordination (被支配地位)as inherent to capitalist societies. Some radical feminist theorists, however, view the oppression of women as inevitable in all male-dominated societies, whether capitalist(资本主义的), socialist(社会主义的), or communist(共产主义的).
An early example of this perspective (long before the label came into use by sociologists) can be seen in the life and writings of Ida Wells-Barnett (1862–1931). Following her groundbreaking publications in the 1890s on the practice of lynching Black American(对黑人处以私刑的陋习), she became an advocate in the women’s rights campaign(女权运动), especially the struggle to win the vote for women. Like feminist theorists who succeeded her, Wells-Barnett used her analysis of society as a means of resisting oppression. In her case, she researched what it meant to be African American, a woman in the United States, and a Black woman in the United States (Wells-Barnett 1970).
Feminist scholarship has broadened our understanding of social behavior by extending the analysis beyond the male point of view. In the past, studies of physical violence typically failed to include domestic violence, in which women are the chief victims. Not only was there a void (真空)in the research; in the field, law enforcement agencies(执法机构)were ill-prepared to deal with such violence. Similarly, feminists have complained that studies of “children having children” (“孩子生孩子”)focus almost entirely on the characteristics and behavior of unwed teenage mothers(未婚少女妈妈), ignoring the unwed father’s role. They have called for more scrutiny of boys and their behavior, as well as their parents and their role models (Ferree 2005; Fields 2005).

Interactionist Perspective
互动论
Workers interacting on the job, encounters in public places like bus stops and parks, behavior in small groups—all these aspects of microsociology catch the attention of interactionists. Whereas functionalist and conflict theorists both analyze large scale, societywide patterns of behavior, theorists who take the interactionist perspective generalize about everyday forms of social interaction in order to explain society as a whole. In the 1990s, for example, the workings of juries (陪审团的运作)became a subject of public scrutiny(大众关注的焦点). High-profile trials (广受瞩目的案件)ended in verdicts(裁决)that left some people shaking their heads. Long before jury members were being interviewed on their front lawns following a trial, interactionists tried to better understand behavior in the small group setting of a jury deliberation room(在陪审团讨论室中小团体的决策行为模式).
Interactionism (also referred to as symbolic interactionism [符号互动论]) is a sociological framework in which human beings are viewed as living in a world of meaningful objects. Those “objects” may include material things, actions, other people, relationships, and even symbols. Interactionists see symbols as an especially important part of human communication (thus the term symbolic interactionism). Symbols have a shared social meaning that is understood by all members of a society. In the United States, for example, a salute(敬礼)symbolizes respect, while a clenched fist signifies defiance(抵抗). Another culture might use different gestures to convey a feeling of respect or defiance. These types of symbolic interaction are classified as forms of nonverbal communication(非语言沟通), which can include many other gestures, facial expressions, and postures.
Symbols in the form of tattoos(文身)took on special importance in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Tattoo parlors in lower Manhattan were overwhelmed with requests from various groups for designs that carried symbolic significance for them. New York City firefighters asked for tattoos with the names of their fallen colleagues; police officers requested designs incorporating their distinctive NYPD shield; recovery workers at Ground Zero sought tattoos that incorporated the image of the giant steel cross, the remnant of a massive cross-beam in a World Trade Center building. Through symbols such as these tattoos, people communicate their values and beliefs to those around them (Scharnberg 2002).
Another manipulation(操作)of symbols can be seen in dress codes. Schools frown on students who wear clothes displaying messages that appear to endorse violence or drug and alcohol consumption. Businesses stipulate the attire employees are allowed to wear on the job in order to impress their customers or clients. In 2005, the National Basketball Association (NBA) adopted a new dress code for the athletes who play professional basketball—one that involved not the uniforms they wear on court, but the clothes they wear off court on league business. The code requires “business casual attire”(“商业休闲装束”)when players are representing the league. Indoor sunglasses, chains, and sleeveless shirts are specifically banned. Figure 1-3 illustrates the new dress code for the millionaire athletes, which the NBA hopes will improve the image of its players, presenting them as responsible, serious-minded adults rather than as overgrown teens one step removed from the neighborhood court.
While the functionalist and conflict approaches were initiated in Europe, interactionism developed first in the United States. George Herbert Mead (乔治•赫伯特•米德,1863–1931) is widely regarded as the founder(创建者)of the interactionist perspective. Mead taught at the University of Chicago from 1893 until his death. As his teachings have become better known, sociologists have expressed greater interest in the interactionist perspective. Many have moved away from what may have been an excessive preoccupation with the large-scale (macro) level of social behavior(长期以来盘踞社会学界的大规模[总体]层次的社会行为研究)and have redirected their attention toward behavior that occurs in small groups (micro level)(小团体[个体层次]内的行为模式).
Erving Goffman (欧文•戈夫曼,1922–1982) popularized a particular type of interactionist method(互动研究法)known as the dramaturgical approach(拟剧法), in which people are seen as theatrical performers. The dramaturgist(拟剧法学者)compares everyday life to the setting of the theater and stage. Just as actors project certain images, all of us seek to present particular features of our personalities while we hide other qualities. Thus, in a class, we may feel the need to project a serious image; at a party, we want to look relaxed and friendly.

The Sociological Approach
社会学方法
Which perspective should a sociologist use in studying human behavior? Functionalist? Conflict? Interactionist? In fact, sociologists make use of all the perspectives summarized in Table 1-2, since each offers unique insights into the same issue. We gain the broadest understanding of our society, then, by drawing on all the major perspectives, noting where they overlap(重叠)and where they diverge(分歧).
Although no one approach is correct by itself, and sociologists draw on all of them for various purposes, many sociologists tend to favor one particular perspective over others. A sociologist’s theoretical orientation(理论取向)influences his or her approach to a research problem in important ways—including the choice of what to study, how to study it, and what questions to pose (or not to pose). (See Box 1-1 on page 21 for an example of how a researcher would study sports from different perspectives.) Whatever the purpose of sociologists’ work, their research will always be guided by their theoretical viewpoints. For example, sociologist Elijah Anderson (以利亚•安德森,1990) embraces both the interactionist perspective and the groundbreaking work(开创性工作)of W. E. B. Du Bois. For 14 years Anderson conducted fieldwork in Philadelphia, where he studied the interactions of Black and White residents who lived in adjoining neighborhoods. In particular, he was interested in their “public behavior,” including their eye contact—or lack of it—as they passed one another on the street. Anderson’s research tells us much about the everyday social interactions of Blacks and Whites in the United States, but it does not explain the larger issues behind those interactions. Like theories, research results illuminate one part of the stage, leaving other parts in relative darkness.


Applied and Clinical Sociology
应用与临床社会学
Many early sociologists—notably, Jane Addams, W. E. B. Du Bois, and George Herbert Mead—were strong advocates for social reform(社会改革). They wanted their theories and findings to be relevant to policymakers and to people’s lives in general. For instance, Mead was the treasurer of Hull House for many years, where he applied his theory to improving the lives of those who were powerless (especially immigrants). He also served on committees dealing with Chicago’s labor problems and public education. Today, applied sociology(应用社会学)is the use of the discipline of sociology with the specific intent of yielding practical applications for human behavior and organizations.
Often, the goal of such work is to assist in resolving a social problem. For example, in the last 40 years, eight presidents of the United States have established commissions to delve into major societal concerns facing our nation. Sociologists are often asked to apply their expertise to studying such issues as violence, pornography(色情), crime, immigration, and population. In Europe, both academic and governmental research departments are offering increasing financial support for applied studies.
One example of applied sociology is the growing interest in the ways in which nationally recognized social problems manifest themselves locally. Since 2003, sociologist Greg Scott(格雷格•斯科特)and his colleagues have been seeking to better understand the connection between illegal drug use(非法使用毒品)and the spread of HIV/AIDS(艾滋病病毒和艾滋病的传播). The study, which will run through 2009, has so far employed 14 researchers from colleges and public health agencies, assisted by an additional 15 graduate and 16 undergraduate students. By combining a variety of methods, including interviews and observation, with photo and video documentation, these researchers have found that across all drug users, HIV/AIDS transmission (艾滋病病毒和艾滋病传播)is highest among users of crystal methamphetamine(晶状甲基安非命使用者). Meth(= methamphetamine)users are also most likely to engage in risky sexual behavior, and to have partners who do so. Fortunately, of all drug users, meth users are the ones most closely connected to health care treatment programs(保健治疗方案), which allows them to receive substance abuse education and treatment(药物滥用的教育和治疗)from their regular health care providers. However, their cases, brought to the forefront by Scott and his team, highlight the need for public health officials to identify other individuals who engage in high-risk sexual behavior and get them into appropriate treatment programs (G. Scott 2005).
Growing interest in applied sociology has led to such specializations as medical sociology (医疗社会学)and environmental sociology(环境社会学). The former includes research on how health care professionals and patients deal with disease. As one example, medical sociologists have studied the social impact of the AIDS crisis on families, friends, and communities (see Chapter 15). Environmental sociologists examine the relationship between human societies and the physical environment. One focus of their work is the issue of “environmental justice” (“环境正义”,see Chapter 16), raised when researchers and community activists found that hazardous waste dumps (危险废弃物)are especially likely to be situated in poor and minority neighborhoods (M.Martin 1996).
The growing popularity of applied sociology has led to the rise of the specialty of clinical sociology. Louis Wirth (1931) wrote about clinical sociology more than 75 years ago, but the term itself has become popular only in recent years. While applied sociology may simply evaluate social issues, clinical sociology is dedicated to facilitating change by altering social relationships (as in family therapy) or restructuring social institutions (as in the reorganization of a medical center).
The Sociological Practice Association(社会学实务协会)was founded in 1978 to promote the application of sociological knowledge to intervention for individual and social change. This professional group has developed a procedure for certifying clinical sociologists(一套社会学的认证制度)—much as physical therapists(物理治疗师)or psychologists(心理治疗师)are certified. In 1999 a new journal was published called Sociological Practice: A Journal of Clinical and Applied Sociology(《社会学实务:临床与应用社会学期刊》).
Applied sociologists generally leave it to others to act on their evaluations. By contrast, clinical sociologists take direct responsibility for implementation and view those with whom they work as their clients. This specialty has become increasingly attractive to graduate students in sociology because it offers an opportunity to apply intellectual learning in a practical way. A shrinking job market in the academic world has made such alternative career routes appealing.
Applied and clinical sociology can be contrasted with basic (or pure) sociology(基础社会学或纯社会学), which seeks a more profound knowledge of the fundamental aspects of social phenomena. This type of research is not necessarily meant to generate specific applications, although such ideas may result once findings are analyzed. When Durkheim studied suicide rates, he was not primarily interested in discovering a way to eliminate suicide. In this sense, his research was an example of basic rather than applied sociology.

TOP 其它信息

印  次:2010年4月第1次印刷

版  次:2010年4月第1版

开  本:787×1092毫米1/16

纸  张:34.5 插页 4

加载页面用时:62.5