{"title":"Politics and sociology","authors":"Edmund S. Ions","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AFTER a tradition of conspicuous neglect, British universities now display a marked enthusiasm for the study of sociology. The enthusiasm-one might even say the cult-is much in evidence at the new universities, but the civic universities, Oxbridge and the C.A.T.s all share it. Students of politics have been among the first to welcome and to appropriate the methods of sociology, and it must seem something of a heresy to air fundamental doubts about these enthusiasms. It must also seem ungracious to doubt the credentials of a subject which has struggled so long for recognition in this country and which is only now coming into its own. It is not my main concern in this article to revive old controversies about whether sociology is indeed a subject: whether it is no more than a technique, a set of heuristic devices which may, to limited degrees, throw fresh light on existing subjects or areas of study; whether it is parasitical, rather than an all-embracing social science as some of its devotees insist. These issues have been raised in the past (which is not to say that they have been satisfactorily settled), and they deserve a lengthier treatment than the confines of an article permit. I wish only to advance some observations on the validity and the suitability of certain concepts, methods and modes of thought which are borrowed by those who term themselves political sociologists, or who otherwise share current enthusiasms for sociological techniques. I begin with a platitude in order to introduce some less obvious remarks. The study of politics is as old as the history of man. Historical accounts of political theory or institutions normally take as their starting points the Greeks reflecting on the problems of the city states, but a moment’s thought suggests that positive attempts to solve the problems of politics are much more ancient. The study of politics began long before the Greek polis. The earlier civilizations of the Nile and the Euphrates valleys sought to solve the problems of law, order and authority just as positively as the Greek or the modern nation State, though not democratically. Ancient myths and oral traditions were by implication political theory in so far as they bolstered the State, however defined, by justifying the ruling hierarchy in terms of tradition. Seen as the attempt to meet the problems of power, its uses and abuses, politics has existed from pre-history to the present: neither the problems it attempts to solve, nor the modes of thought involved, are the prisoner of any language or era.","PeriodicalId":151999,"journal":{"name":"Jewish Sociology & Social Research","volume":"90 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1968-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jewish Sociology & Social Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1968.tb00422.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
AFTER a tradition of conspicuous neglect, British universities now display a marked enthusiasm for the study of sociology. The enthusiasm-one might even say the cult-is much in evidence at the new universities, but the civic universities, Oxbridge and the C.A.T.s all share it. Students of politics have been among the first to welcome and to appropriate the methods of sociology, and it must seem something of a heresy to air fundamental doubts about these enthusiasms. It must also seem ungracious to doubt the credentials of a subject which has struggled so long for recognition in this country and which is only now coming into its own. It is not my main concern in this article to revive old controversies about whether sociology is indeed a subject: whether it is no more than a technique, a set of heuristic devices which may, to limited degrees, throw fresh light on existing subjects or areas of study; whether it is parasitical, rather than an all-embracing social science as some of its devotees insist. These issues have been raised in the past (which is not to say that they have been satisfactorily settled), and they deserve a lengthier treatment than the confines of an article permit. I wish only to advance some observations on the validity and the suitability of certain concepts, methods and modes of thought which are borrowed by those who term themselves political sociologists, or who otherwise share current enthusiasms for sociological techniques. I begin with a platitude in order to introduce some less obvious remarks. The study of politics is as old as the history of man. Historical accounts of political theory or institutions normally take as their starting points the Greeks reflecting on the problems of the city states, but a moment’s thought suggests that positive attempts to solve the problems of politics are much more ancient. The study of politics began long before the Greek polis. The earlier civilizations of the Nile and the Euphrates valleys sought to solve the problems of law, order and authority just as positively as the Greek or the modern nation State, though not democratically. Ancient myths and oral traditions were by implication political theory in so far as they bolstered the State, however defined, by justifying the ruling hierarchy in terms of tradition. Seen as the attempt to meet the problems of power, its uses and abuses, politics has existed from pre-history to the present: neither the problems it attempts to solve, nor the modes of thought involved, are the prisoner of any language or era.