Sorokin and Parsons at Harvard: Institutional conflict and the origin of a hegemonic tradition

Johnston, Barry V.

doi:10.1002/1520-6696(198604)22:2<107::aid-jhbs2300220203>3.0.co;2-a

Cited by 26 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…His knowledge of these disciplines was mainly narrowed down to American scholars, and, even in such a circumscribed area, his theoretical decisions were not the timeliest ones either. For example, one of his most cited references in the field of sociology was Harvard professor Pitrim Sorokin, who had sympathy for systems theory but had already been displaced in the early 1930s by the sociologist-also from Harvard-Talcott Parsons as the most recognized exponent of systems theory (Johnston, 1986). Despite Parsons was a very influential figure within social sciences, and his theories were well known and widely discussed, Bertalanffy paid minimal attention to his extensive work.…”

Section: The System Theories Of Social Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The unity of (social systems) science: The legacy of Bertalanffy

Cadenas

2019

Syst Res Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article discusses Bertalanffy's project for the unity of science in the particular field of social sciences. The aim is to analyse shortcomings and to sketch new approaches to this matter. We identify two main obstacles, namely, the inner differentiation of social systems science and the threat of methodological nativism to Bertalanffy's project. Furthermore, the article examines the concepts of scientific system and cosmopolitanism as opposites to such obstacles and as legacies of Bertalanffy's view of science as well. The conclusion resumes the arguments and proposes new paths for general systems theory. KEYWORDS cosmopolitanism, general systems theory, methodological nativism, unity of science, world society 1 The same idea is proposed by Midgley (2007) but considered only from a methodological point of view.

show abstract

Section: The System Theories Of Social Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The unity of (social systems) science: The legacy of Bertalanffy

Cadenas

2019

Syst Res Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, Theories increased the degree of shared ownership by making many European sources available to American sociologists for the first time. 47 Sorokin's Theories also apparently conformed to the scientific norms of disinterestedness and skepticism. With regard to the latter, F. Stuart Chapin, Chairman of the Department of Sociology at Minnesota and a famous hardheaded empiricist, provided an unequivocal endorsement.…”

Section: Sorokin's Deviance: Historical Phases Positive Deviance: Dismentioning

confidence: 99%

Deviance and social science: The instructive historical case of Pitirim Sorokin

Nichols

1989

J. Hist. Behav. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historical deviance in the sciences is approached through the perspective of interpretive sociology. According to this approach, the professional identities of scientists are always “at risk.” Over periods of time, the potentiality for either positive or negative deviance generates “moral careers” for scientists. Such careers are denned by shifting evaluations of scientists' worth by authoritative and powerful audiences. This conceptualization is developed through an in‐depth analysis of the career of sociologist Pitirim A. Sorokin. The analysis shows how Sorokin was initially elevated for positive deviance, then stigmatized for perceived negative deviance, and ultimately restored to a place of honor in social science. The implications of the conceptual framework for future studies of deviance in science are briefly discussed.

show abstract

“…The account typically focuses on the conjunction of two events at Harvard University in the 1930s. The first was the foundation of a separate Department of Sociology in 1931 after decades during which sociology had been taught within the Department of Economics, by Edward Cummings from 1893 to 1902 and then by Thomas Nixon Carver (Sorokin 1963; Mason 1982; Homans 1984; Johnston 1986). The second event was the organization by Lawrence Henderson of a seminar group that met between 1932 and 1934 to study the sociological thought of Vilfredo Pareto, the Italian successor to Léon Walras as Professor of Economics at Lausanne University (Homans and Curtis 1934; Henderson 1935; Heyl 1968; Weintraub 1991: 62–66).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pareto, Parsons, and the Boundary Between Economics and Sociology

Dalziel¹,

Higgins²

2006

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent discussions of the separation between economics and sociology in the United States highlight the way Talcott Parsons used Vilfredo Pareto's Trattato di Sociologia Generale to propose that economics study logical actions and sociology study nonlogical actions. This article argues instead that in Pareto's treatise: (1) sociology is a synthetic discipline concerned with the study of human society in general; (2) human behavior is nearly always logical from a subjective point of view; and (3) sociology studies both logical and nonlogical behavior judged from an objective viewpoint. Thus, Pareto is an important intellectual ancestor for economic sociology.

show abstract

Sorokin and Parsons at Harvard: Institutional conflict and the origin of a hegemonic tradition

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

The unity of (social systems) science: The legacy of Bertalanffy

The unity of (social systems) science: The legacy of Bertalanffy

Deviance and social science: The instructive historical case of Pitirim Sorokin

Pareto, Parsons, and the Boundary Between Economics and Sociology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About