Jeffrey C. Alexander | |
---|---|
Born | Jeffrey Charles Alexander May 30, 1947 |
Occupation | Professor Emeritus of Sociology |
Children | Aaron Alexander-bloch |
Academic background | |
Education | |
Thesis | Theoretical Logic in Sociology (1978) |
Doctoral advisor | Robert N. Bellah [1] |
Other advisors | Leo Lowenthal, Neil Smelser |
Influences | |
Academic work | |
Discipline | Sociology |
Sub-discipline | Cultural sociology |
School or tradition | Neofunctionalism |
Institutions |
Jeffrey Charles Alexander (born 1947) is an American sociologist,and a prominent social theorist. He is the founding figure in the school of cultural sociology he refers to as the "strong program".
He was born May 30,1947,in Milwaukee,Wisconsin. [4] Alexander gained his Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard University in 1969 and his Doctor of Philosophy degree from the University of California,Berkeley,in 1978. [4] [5] [6] He was originally interested in Marxist sociology and followed the work of Fred Block and debates in the journal Socialist Revolution,but evolved to a democratic socialist,then left liberal position. [6]
Later he worked with Neil Smelser,Robert N. Bellah,and Leo Lowenthal. Each of whom were on his dissertation committee,with the chair being Bellah,a former student of Talcott Parsons. Alexander's dissertation,Theoretical Logic in Sociology,was published as a four-volume set. Volume 1 was subtitled Positivism,Presuppositions,and Current Controversies,Volume 2 was The Antimonies of Classical Thought:Marx and Durkheim,Volume 3 was The Classical Attempt at Theoretical Synthesis:Max Weber,and Volume 4 was subtitled The Modern Reconstruction of Classical Thought:Talcott Parsons. At the time,many theorists were attempting to revive Parsons after a decade of criticisms,and Alexander's Theoretical Logic in Sociology was part of this revival.
He worked at the University of California,Los Angeles,from 1974 until joining Yale University in 2001,where (as of 2008) he is the Lillian Chavenson Saden Professor of Sociology and co-director of the Center for Cultural Sociology. [7]
Alexander has authored or co-authored ten books. [5] He was one of the editors of the journal Sociological Theory , [8] and he is currently co-editor of the American Journal of Cultural Sociology. [9]
He received honorary doctorates from La Trobe University,Melbourne and the University College Dublin,Ireland. In 2004,he won the Clifford Geertz Award for Best Article in Cultural Sociology and in 2008,he won the Mary Douglas Prize for Best Book in Cultural Sociology. He also received the 2007 Theory Prize from the Theory Section of the American Sociological Association for best theoretical article. In 2009,he received The Foundation Mattei Dogan Prize in Sociology by the International Sociological Association,awarded every four years in recognition of lifetime accomplishments to "a scholar of very high standing in the profession and of outstanding international reputation." [10]
Notable students of Jeffrey Alexander include Ronald Jacobs, [11] Philip Smith, [12] Isaac Reed, [13] Matthew Norton, [14] and Elizabeth Breese. [15]
In sociology,neofunctionalism represents a revival of the thought of Talcott Parsons by Jeffrey C. Alexander,who sees neofunctionalism as having five central tendencies:
While Parsons consistently viewed actors as analytical concepts,Alexander defines action as the movement of concrete,living,breathing persons as they make their way through time and space. In addition he argues that every action contains a dimension of free will,by which he is expanding functionalism to include some of the concerns of symbolic interactionism. [16]
Starting in the late 1980s,Alexander's work turned toward cultural sociology. Key to this cultural turn was a shift in emphasis from an engagement with Parsonian structural functionalism toward a rereading of Emile Durkheim's later works,which featured a strong interest in cultural systems. Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life was key to Alexander's thought,as in this work Durkheim analyzes the ways by which collective representations emerge and function,as well as the role of rituals in maintaining solidarity and reiterating society's norms and values to the congregation. Alexander picks up specifically on Durkheim's suggestion that the religious processes observed in tribal societies are as pertinent in modern societies. Regardless of whether modern societies believe themselves to be rational and secular,their civil life and processes,claims Alexander,are underpinned by collective representations,by strong emotional ties and by various narratives that—much like tribal societies—tell society what it believes it is and what values it holds sacred. [17]
Alexander distinguishes between the sociology of culture and cultural sociology. The sociology of culture sees culture as a dependent variable—that is,a product of extra-cultural factors such as the economy or interest-laden politics—whereas cultural sociology sees culture as having more autonomy and gives more weight to inner meanings. In other words,in Alexander's conception of cultural sociology assumes that ideas and symbolic processes may have an independent effect on social institutions,on politics,and on culture itself. [18] [ page needed ] Alexander strongly distinguishes this sociological perspective from the then-dominant Bourdieusian sociological framework,which tends to see cultural processes as embedded in power struggles,and ultimately in material inequality. [19]
Two of Alexander's earlier articles foreshadow a more direct engagement with the topic of trauma. In one,he demonstrates that Western societies did not immediately interpret the Holocaust as universally signifying universal evil. (Rather than that,a long process of narration and signification constructed the Holocaust image. [20] [ page range too broad ] [21] [ page needed ]) In the second article,Alexander shows that American society did not initially perceive the Watergate scandal as much more than a minor incident. [22] Here,too,the incident had to be culturally narrated and constructed as involving the core values of American society, [23] turning what was first thought to be a mundane faux-pas into a full-fledged scandal. [24] A key claim of both studies is that even events that are currently thought of as deeply traumatic for civil society are not inherently devastating but are rather constructed as such through cultural processes.
More generally,Alexander differentiates "cultural trauma" from what he calls "lay trauma" in social thought. "Lay trauma" refers to the idea that certain events are inherently traumatic to the individuals who experience them—for example,the idea of trauma in psychology. However,"cultural trauma" approach cannot assume that any event—as horrendous as it may be—will turn into a trauma for the collective who encounters it. As Alexander explains,"[C]ultural trauma occurs when members of a collectivity feel they have been subjected to a horrendous event that leaves indelible marks upon their group consciousness,marking their memories forever and changing their future identity in fundamental and irrevocable ways". [25]
In the mid-2000s Alexander turned attention toward the ways actors create social or cultural performances,which are "the social process[es] by which actors,individually or in concert,display for others the meaning of their social situation". [26] Actors,claims Alexander,care deeply about having others believe the meanings they attempt to convey,and to this end they seek to create a performance as authentic-looking as possible. To do so,they engage in what Alexander calls "cultural pragmatics" and draw upon the various elements of social performance:the systems of collective representation,means of symbolic production,mise-en-scène arrangements (much like a theater production would).
Alexander claims that in tribal societies the various elements of cultural performance were tightly fused,and were employed in collective rituals in which the entire tribe partook and its members experienced first-hand. In modern societies,these various elements became de-fused (as per Weber's sphere differentiation) and for this reason actors who wish to appear authentic must draw upon various repertoires. "Fusion",in Alexander's terms,is the moment in a performance when the various elements click together,generate an effective performance,and ultimately move the audience to psychological identification with the actors. A failed performance will be one that the audience will perceive as inauthentic,and will not develop the sense of identification the actors desired. [27]
In recent years,Alexander has turned attention towards the material aspects of culture,extending his specific strand of cultural sociology towards aesthetics and particularly icons. As he defines it,iconic consciousness occurs "when an aesthetically shaped materiality signifies social value. Contact with this aesthetic surface,whether by sight,smell,taste,touch provides a sensual experience that transmits meaning ...". [28] In contradistinction with various sociologies of culture that have tended to see the visual or the material as a form of falsity or degradation,Alexander draws on the Durkheimian notion of the symbolic collective representation to argue that the ways in which culture operates—both in instilling and in recreating values—is intrinsically tied to symbolic material forms.
Studies following Alexander's approach have looked,for example,into the ways in which architecture is embedded in a deep meaning structure and have deep emotional resonance with the society that frequents them. [29] Others have extended the idea of iconic consciousness into the realm of celebrities,and have explored the ways in which celebrities on one hand present an appealing aesthetic "surface" and on the other hand condense and convey a locus of "deep" meanings that resonate with the audience. [30]
Following the Egyptian Revolution,Alexander conducted a study of the revolutionary months from a cultural sociological point of view,applying some of his previous theories in order to understand the ways in which the various protests voiced by demonstrators,journalists,bloggers,and public actors ultimately persuaded the Egyptian army to turn against the regime. The key to understanding the revolution,claims Alexander,is in the binary structure these various actors applied to the Moubarak regime,persuasively depicting it as corrupt and outdated and thereby convincing the wider public that it was a menace to Egyptian society. [31] [ page needed ]
David Émile Durkheim was a French sociologist. Durkheim formally established the academic discipline of sociology and is commonly cited as one of the principal architects of modern social science,along with both Karl Marx and Max Weber.
Talcott Parsons was an American sociologist of the classical tradition,best known for his social action theory and structural functionalism. Parsons is considered one of the most influential figures in sociology in the 20th century. After earning a PhD in economics,he served on the faculty at Harvard University from 1927 to 1973. In 1930,he was among the first professors in its new sociology department. Later,he was instrumental in the establishment of the Department of Social Relations at Harvard.
The sociology of knowledge is the study of the relationship between human thought,the social context within which it arises,and the effects that prevailing ideas have on societies. It is not a specialized area of sociology. Instead,it deals with broad fundamental questions about the extent and limits of social influences on individuals' lives and the social-cultural basis of our knowledge about the world. The sociology of knowledge has a subclass and a complement. Its subclass is sociology of scientific knowledge. Its complement is the sociology of ignorance.
Anthropology of religion is the study of religion in relation to other social institutions,and the comparison of religious beliefs and practices across cultures. The anthropology of religion,as a field,overlaps with but is distinct from the field of Religious Studies. The history of anthropology of religion is a history of striving to understand how other people view and navigate the world. This history involves deciding what religion is,what it does,and how it functions. Today,one of the main concerns of anthropologists of religion is defining religion,which is a theoretical undertaking in and of itself. Scholars such as Edward Tylor,Emile Durkheim,E.E. Evans Pritchard,Mary Douglas,Victor Turner,Clifford Geertz,and Talal Asad have all grappled with defining and characterizing religion anthropologically.
Structural functionalism,or simply functionalism,is "a framework for building theory that sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability".
Ritualization refers to the process by which a sequence of non-communicating actions or an event is invested with cultural,social or religious significance. This definition emphasizes the transformation of everyday actions into rituals that carry deeper meaning within a cultural or religious context. Rituals are symbolic,repetitive,and often prescribed activities that hold religious or cultural significance for a certain group of people. They serve various purposes:promoting social solidarity by expressing shared values,facilitating the transmission of cultural knowledge and regulating emotions.
A cultural system is the interaction of different elements in culture. While a cultural system is very different from a social system,sometimes both systems together are referred to as the sociocultural system.
Sociology as a scholarly discipline emerged,primarily out of Enlightenment thought,as a positivist science of society shortly after the French Revolution. Its genesis owed to various key movements in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of knowledge,arising in reaction to such issues as modernity,capitalism,urbanization,rationalization,secularization,colonization and imperialism.
Robert Neelly Bellah was an American sociologist and the Elliott Professor of Sociology at the University of California,Berkeley. He was internationally known for his work related to the sociology of religion.
Symbolic anthropology or,more broadly,symbolic and interpretive anthropology,is the study of cultural symbols and how those symbols can be used to gain a better understanding of a particular society. According to Clifford Geertz,"[b]elieving,with Max Weber,that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun,I take culture to be those webs,and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning". In theory,symbolic anthropology assumes that culture lies within the basis of the individuals’interpretation of their surrounding environment,and that it does not in fact exist beyond the individuals themselves. Furthermore,the meaning assigned to people's behavior is molded by their culturally established symbols. Symbolic anthropology aims to thoroughly understand the way meanings are assigned by individuals to certain things,leading then to a cultural expression. There are two majorly recognized approaches to the interpretation of symbolic anthropology,the interpretive approach,and the symbolic approach. Both approaches are products of different figures,Clifford Geertz (interpretive) and Victor Turner (symbolic). There is also another key figure in symbolic anthropology,David M. Schneider,who does not particularly fall into either of the schools of thought. Symbolic anthropology follows a literary basis instead of an empirical one meaning there is less of a concern with objects of science such as mathematics or logic,instead of focusing on tools like psychology and literature. That is not to say fieldwork is not done in symbolic anthropology,but the research interpretation is assessed in a more ideological basis.
The sociology of culture,and the related cultural sociology,concerns the systematic analysis of culture,usually understood as the ensemble of symbolic codes used by a member of a society,as it is manifested in the society. For Georg Simmel,culture referred to "the cultivation of individuals through the agency of external forms which have been objectified in the course of history". Culture in the sociological field is analyzed as the ways of thinking and describing,acting,and the material objects that together shape a group of people's way of life.
A sociological theory is a supposition that intends to consider,analyze,and/or explain objects of social reality from a sociological perspective,drawing connections between individual concepts in order to organize and substantiate sociological knowledge. Hence,such knowledge is composed of complex theoretical frameworks and methodology.
Randall Collins is an American sociologist who has been influential in both his teaching and writing. He has taught in many notable universities around the world and his academic works have been translated into various languages. Collins is currently the Dorothy Swaine Thomas Professor of Sociology,Emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a leading contemporary social theorist whose areas of expertise include the macro-historical sociology of political and economic change;micro-sociology,including face-to-face interaction;and the sociology of intellectuals and social conflict. Collins's publications include The Sociology of Philosophies:A Global Theory of Intellectual Change (1998),which analyzes the network of philosophers and mathematicians for over two thousand years in both Asian and Western societies. His current research involves macro patterns of violence including contemporary war,as well as solutions to police violence. He is considered to be one of the leading non-Marxist conflict theorists in the United States,and served as the president of the American Sociological Association from 2010 to 2011.
Symbolic culture,or non-material culture,is the ability to learn and transmit behavioral traditions from one generation to the next by the invention of things that exist entirely in the symbolic realm. Symbolic culture is usually conceived as the cultural realm constructed and inhabited uniquely by Homo sapiens and is differentiated from ordinary culture,which many other animals possess. Symbolic culture is studied by archaeologists,social anthropologists and sociologists. From 2018,however,some evidence of a Neanderthal origin of symbolic culture emerged. Symbolic culture contrasts with material culture,which involves physical entities of cultural value and includes the usage,consumption,creation,and trade of objects.
Sociological,psychological,and anthropological theories about religion generally attempt to explain the origin and function of religion. These theories define what they present as universal characteristics of religious belief and practice.
Sociology is the scientific study of human society that focuses on society,human social behavior,patterns of social relationships,social interaction,and aspects of culture associated with everyday life. Regarded as a part of both the social sciences and humanities,sociology uses various methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop a body of knowledge about social order and social change. Sociological subject matter ranges from micro-level analyses of individual interaction and agency to macro-level analyses of social systems and social structure. Applied sociological research may be applied directly to social policy and welfare,whereas theoretical approaches may focus on the understanding of social processes and phenomenological method.
Symbolic boundaries are a theory of how people form social groups proposed by cultural sociologists. Symbolic boundaries are “conceptual distinctions made by social actors…that separate people into groups and generate feelings of similarity and group membership.”
This bibliography of sociology is a list of works,organized by subdiscipline,on the subject of sociology. Some of the works are selected from general anthologies of sociology,while other works are selected because they are notable enough to be mentioned in a general history of sociology or one of its subdisciplines.
Jeffrey K. Olick is an American sociologist. Currently,he is William R. Kenan,Jr. Professor of Sociology and History at the University of Virginia. He is also co-president of the Memory Studies Association. Olick is a major figure in cultural sociology and social theory and has made significant contributions to the interdisciplinary field of memory studies.
Richard Münch is a German sociologist and,as of 2013,emeritus of excellence at the University of Bamberg. He graduated from the Hebel Gymnasium Pforzheim in 1965. He studied sociology,philosophy,and psychology at the University of Heidelberg from 1965 to 1970,earning the degrees of Magister Artium in 1969 and Dr. phil. in 1971. His habilitation in the field of sociology took place at the University of Augsburg in 1972 where he was employed as a research assistant at the Chair of Sociology and Communication Studies from 1970 to 1974. From 1974 to 1976 he taught as Professor of Sociology at the University of Cologne,from 1976 to 1995 as Professor of Social Science at the Heinrich Heine University of Düsseldorf,and from 1995 to 2013 as Professor of Sociology at the Otto Friedrich University of Bamberg where he was appointed Emeritus of Excellence in 2013. Since 2015,he has been a senior professor of social theory and comparative macrosociology at Zeppelin University in Friedrichshafen,Lake Constance.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)The incident received little attention, generating no real sense of outrage at the time. There were no cries of outrage.
The hearings ended without making law or issuing specific judgments of evidence, but they nevertheless had profound effects. They helped to establish and fully legitimate a framework that henceforth gave the Watergate crisis its meaning. They accomplished this by continuing and deepening the cultural process that had begun before the election itself. Actual events and characters in the Watergate episode were organized in terms of the higher antitheses between the pure and the impure elements of America's civil culture.
Two years after the break-in, by summer 1974, public opinion had sharply changed. Now Watergate was regarded as an issue that violated fundamental customs and morals, and eventually - by 50 percent of the population - as a challenge to the most sacred values that sustained political order itself.