Styles of sociological thought: Sociologies, epistemologies, and the Mexican and U.S. quests for truth

Gabriel Abend

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Abstract

    Both U.S. and Mexican sociologies allege that they are in the business of making true scientific knowledge claims about the social world. Conventional conceptions of science notwithstanding, I demonstrate that their claims to truth and scientificity are based on alternative epistemological grounds. Drawing a random sample of nonquantitative articles from four leading journals, I show that, first, they assign a different role to theories, and indeed they have dissimilar understandings of what a theory should consist of. Second, whereas U.S. sociology actively struggles against subjectivity, Mexican sociology maximizes the potentials of subjective viewpoints. Third, U.S. sociologists tend to regard highly and Mexican sociologists to eagerly disregard the principle of ethical neutrality. These consistent and systematic differences raise two theoretical issues. First, I argue that Mexican and U.S. sociologies are epistemologically, semantically, and perceptually incommensurable. I contend that this problem is crucial for sociology's interest in the social conditioning of scientific knowledge's content. Second, I suggest four lines of thought that can help us explain the epistemological differences I find. Finally, I argue that sociologists would greatly profit from studying epistemologies in the same fashion they have studied other kinds of scientific and nonscientific beliefs.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)1-41
    Number of pages41
    JournalSociological Theory
    Volume24
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Mar 2006

    Fingerprint

    sociologist
    epistemology
    sociology
    neutrality
    conditioning
    random sample
    knowledge
    subjectivity
    profit
    science

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    Styles of sociological thought : Sociologies, epistemologies, and the Mexican and U.S. quests for truth. / Abend, Gabriel.

    In: Sociological Theory, Vol. 24, No. 1, 03.2006, p. 1-41.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    @article{56b7474b62e54ce8a285fb3950255a77,
    title = "Styles of sociological thought: Sociologies, epistemologies, and the Mexican and U.S. quests for truth",
    abstract = "Both U.S. and Mexican sociologies allege that they are in the business of making true scientific knowledge claims about the social world. Conventional conceptions of science notwithstanding, I demonstrate that their claims to truth and scientificity are based on alternative epistemological grounds. Drawing a random sample of nonquantitative articles from four leading journals, I show that, first, they assign a different role to theories, and indeed they have dissimilar understandings of what a theory should consist of. Second, whereas U.S. sociology actively struggles against subjectivity, Mexican sociology maximizes the potentials of subjective viewpoints. Third, U.S. sociologists tend to regard highly and Mexican sociologists to eagerly disregard the principle of ethical neutrality. These consistent and systematic differences raise two theoretical issues. First, I argue that Mexican and U.S. sociologies are epistemologically, semantically, and perceptually incommensurable. I contend that this problem is crucial for sociology's interest in the social conditioning of scientific knowledge's content. Second, I suggest four lines of thought that can help us explain the epistemological differences I find. Finally, I argue that sociologists would greatly profit from studying epistemologies in the same fashion they have studied other kinds of scientific and nonscientific beliefs.",
    author = "Gabriel Abend",
    year = "2006",
    month = "3",
    doi = "10.1111/j.0735-2751.2006.00262.x",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "24",
    pages = "1--41",
    journal = "Sociological Theory",
    issn = "0735-2751",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Styles of sociological thought

    T2 - Sociologies, epistemologies, and the Mexican and U.S. quests for truth

    AU - Abend, Gabriel

    PY - 2006/3

    Y1 - 2006/3

    N2 - Both U.S. and Mexican sociologies allege that they are in the business of making true scientific knowledge claims about the social world. Conventional conceptions of science notwithstanding, I demonstrate that their claims to truth and scientificity are based on alternative epistemological grounds. Drawing a random sample of nonquantitative articles from four leading journals, I show that, first, they assign a different role to theories, and indeed they have dissimilar understandings of what a theory should consist of. Second, whereas U.S. sociology actively struggles against subjectivity, Mexican sociology maximizes the potentials of subjective viewpoints. Third, U.S. sociologists tend to regard highly and Mexican sociologists to eagerly disregard the principle of ethical neutrality. These consistent and systematic differences raise two theoretical issues. First, I argue that Mexican and U.S. sociologies are epistemologically, semantically, and perceptually incommensurable. I contend that this problem is crucial for sociology's interest in the social conditioning of scientific knowledge's content. Second, I suggest four lines of thought that can help us explain the epistemological differences I find. Finally, I argue that sociologists would greatly profit from studying epistemologies in the same fashion they have studied other kinds of scientific and nonscientific beliefs.

    AB - Both U.S. and Mexican sociologies allege that they are in the business of making true scientific knowledge claims about the social world. Conventional conceptions of science notwithstanding, I demonstrate that their claims to truth and scientificity are based on alternative epistemological grounds. Drawing a random sample of nonquantitative articles from four leading journals, I show that, first, they assign a different role to theories, and indeed they have dissimilar understandings of what a theory should consist of. Second, whereas U.S. sociology actively struggles against subjectivity, Mexican sociology maximizes the potentials of subjective viewpoints. Third, U.S. sociologists tend to regard highly and Mexican sociologists to eagerly disregard the principle of ethical neutrality. These consistent and systematic differences raise two theoretical issues. First, I argue that Mexican and U.S. sociologies are epistemologically, semantically, and perceptually incommensurable. I contend that this problem is crucial for sociology's interest in the social conditioning of scientific knowledge's content. Second, I suggest four lines of thought that can help us explain the epistemological differences I find. Finally, I argue that sociologists would greatly profit from studying epistemologies in the same fashion they have studied other kinds of scientific and nonscientific beliefs.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33645153919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33645153919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1111/j.0735-2751.2006.00262.x

    DO - 10.1111/j.0735-2751.2006.00262.x

    M3 - Review article

    VL - 24

    SP - 1

    EP - 41

    JO - Sociological Theory

    JF - Sociological Theory

    SN - 0735-2751

    IS - 1

    ER -