论社会学理论中警句的矛盾心理

IF 4.1 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
T. Crosbie, J. Guhin
{"title":"论社会学理论中警句的矛盾心理","authors":"T. Crosbie, J. Guhin","doi":"10.1177/0735275119888253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sociologists have long been taken by certain pithy expressions from the founders of the discipline. We propose here both a new explanation for the endurance of these statements as well as an analysis of the power, limitations, and possibilities of aphorisms. By drawing from the critical scholarship concerned with aphorisms, we demonstrate that some of the allure of the classical sociological texts derives from their form, and particularly their reliance on the relative autonomy of the aphorism. Through examining Marx’s “opiate of the people,” Weber’s “iron cage,” and, briefly, two more contemporary sociological aphorisms, we suggest that aphorisms have an ambivalent role in sociological theory: they make claims memorable even as they potentially oversimplify complex arguments. Yet that very simplification can provide a point of focus for productive misreading and reinterpretation.","PeriodicalId":48131,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0735275119888253","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Ambivalence of the Aphorism in Sociological Theory\",\"authors\":\"T. Crosbie, J. Guhin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0735275119888253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sociologists have long been taken by certain pithy expressions from the founders of the discipline. We propose here both a new explanation for the endurance of these statements as well as an analysis of the power, limitations, and possibilities of aphorisms. By drawing from the critical scholarship concerned with aphorisms, we demonstrate that some of the allure of the classical sociological texts derives from their form, and particularly their reliance on the relative autonomy of the aphorism. Through examining Marx’s “opiate of the people,” Weber’s “iron cage,” and, briefly, two more contemporary sociological aphorisms, we suggest that aphorisms have an ambivalent role in sociological theory: they make claims memorable even as they potentially oversimplify complex arguments. Yet that very simplification can provide a point of focus for productive misreading and reinterpretation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0735275119888253\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275119888253\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275119888253","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

长期以来,社会学家一直被这门学科创始人的某些精辟表述所吸引。我们在此提出一种新的解释,解释这些警句的持久性,并分析警句的力量、局限性和可能性。通过借鉴与警句有关的批判性学术,我们证明了经典社会学文本的一些吸引力来自于它们的形式,特别是它们对警句相对自主性的依赖。通过考察马克思的“人民鸦片”、韦伯的“铁笼”,以及另外两条当代社会学格言,我们认为格言在社会学理论中扮演着矛盾的角色:它们使主张令人难忘,即使它们可能过度简化复杂的论点。然而,这种简化可能会为有效的误读和重新解释提供一个焦点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Ambivalence of the Aphorism in Sociological Theory
Sociologists have long been taken by certain pithy expressions from the founders of the discipline. We propose here both a new explanation for the endurance of these statements as well as an analysis of the power, limitations, and possibilities of aphorisms. By drawing from the critical scholarship concerned with aphorisms, we demonstrate that some of the allure of the classical sociological texts derives from their form, and particularly their reliance on the relative autonomy of the aphorism. Through examining Marx’s “opiate of the people,” Weber’s “iron cage,” and, briefly, two more contemporary sociological aphorisms, we suggest that aphorisms have an ambivalent role in sociological theory: they make claims memorable even as they potentially oversimplify complex arguments. Yet that very simplification can provide a point of focus for productive misreading and reinterpretation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sociological Theory
Sociological Theory SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.80%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Published for the American Sociological Association, this important journal covers the full range of sociological theory - from ethnomethodology to world systems analysis, from commentaries on the classics to the latest cutting-edge ideas, and from re-examinations of neglected theorists to metatheoretical inquiries. Its themes and contributions are interdisciplinary, its orientation pluralistic, its pages open to commentary and debate. Renowned for publishing the best international research and scholarship, Sociological Theory is essential reading for sociologists and social theorists alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信