G.Duncan Mitchell - A Hundred Years of Sociology

First published 2007 by Transaction Publishers

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

2007024722

ISBN 13: 978-0-202-36168-0 (pbk)

It is said of a Professor of Modern History, who retired not so very long ago, that his course of lectures ended at the sixteenth century. Some historians are more adventurous, even rash. This history might be considered a case of rashness. In self-defence, let me say that there does appear to be a demand for an historical treatment of sociology, and that if one is to write in a Hundred Years Series, then a history of sociology is not a bad thing to write about. Of course, one can trace the origins of the subject, like most other things, back to antiquity. Did not Aristotle make a comparative study of political constitutions? But the fact remains that most of what we call sociology is a recent phenomenon, dating largely from the work of Montesquieu, Saint-Simon and Comte, with inspiration from de Tocqueville and Marx. In short, it is a matter of about two hundred and twenty years of history i.e. since the publication of De V esprit des lois. This particular history covers half this period, and the latter half at that; as such it is recent history, always the most difficult to write.

Within the limits set it has not been possible to describe and discuss the founding fathers of sociology. A marginal case is to be seen in the work of Karl Marx. His work, especially his early work which has had an impact recently on some younger sociologists, comes before the time when this history begins. His later work, especially Capital published in 1867, had a profound influence on Max Weber, but it is not a sociological treatise, nor strictly can Marx be said to be a sociologist. In any case there are several excellent expositions of his work and accordingly only brief mention is made of it here.

A history is necessarily highly selective and betrays, nay exposes clearly, the historian's prejudices; this history is no exception. The writer's intention has been to trace the various traditions informing the development of an academic discipline; some are very disparate. It may well be the case that the writer has imposed a coherence that is spurious. When considering some of the very recent developments of the subject, especially those in the U.S.A., one may well wonder if there is any connection between the present emphasis on quantified empirical operational research and the reflections of the first occupants of sociology chairs in that country. It may be too early to say what direction the subject will take, but a discipline which does not reflect on its past can easily become narrow, obsessive and trivial. The fundamental problems of sociology are not new. One of the author's prejudices is that too much attention in a history of sociology should not be given to very recent developments. It is difficult to focus on what is very close, and a subject when popular, as sociology is today, is apt to succumb to fashions; and fashions change. Accordingly, little is said about some matters of interest to contemporary sociologists, about the developments in the theory of symbolic interaction, for instance, or about the use of mathematical models in sociology. Indeed, there are many novel products of the contemporary sociologist's imagination some of which, doubtless, will appear in a future history of the subject. For the most part in this book only the most prominent and well known recent developments are mentioned and much that has occurred since the mid-1950s is ignored.

Little has been said about the application of sociology, about criminology for instance, but this subject, like other applications which loom larger and larger as sociology is seen to be more and more useful, requires special treatment. This is especially true when one considers how applications of sociology are usually combined with applications of other social sciencespsychology, social medicine, law and economics. These things deserve separate and special treatment and are not included here. In this book, which has been kept to a reasonable length, I have tried to tell the story of an intellectual adventure that is both distinctive and interesting. I have been helped to accomplish it by the interest of my colleagues, whose brains I have shamelessly picked from time to time; but then this is the privilege of working in a large university department.

Writing a book when one is already engaged in a teaching programme and when one has more than the normal amount of university administration to do does create some strains and stresses. My thanks therefore are extended to my family and my colleagues who have borne with my irritabilities whilst this book was taking shape. I wish to thank especially Dr. Margaret Hewitt, who read Chapter XVI and made helpful comments and suggestions; Miss Pamela Ffooks, who performed a valiant piece of work with a typewriter at short notice and found time also to correct some infelicities in style and expression; and my secretary Miss A. Gosling.

All history is story-telling and the first condition of a good story-teller is to be interesting. I shall withstand with equanimity most other criticisms if I have succeeded in making sociology appear an interesting adventure in ideas and enquiries.

Exeter March 1968

For permission to cite passages from the following books, the author wishes to express his thanks to the authors and publishers:

R. F. Bales, Interaction Process Analysis (Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.); F. Thrasher, The Gang, and R. E. Park, "The City", American Journal of Sociology, 1916 (University of Chicago Press); M. I. Alihan, Social Ecology (Cooper Square Publishers); L. L. and J. S. Bernard, Origins of American Sociology (T. Y. Crowell Co.); F. Boulard,