ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00836.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTParsons and I were friends and colleagues from 1963 until his death in 1979. I recall, herein, a small part of our personal and intellectual relationship, especially that portion having to do with the creation of The American University.

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00837.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

On Shakespeare's stage. the rattle of thunder framed the comings and goings of princes. Other heralds bracket the years of this story: the rattle o f choppers crossing the Parrot's Beak, and stirring the sand at Desert One. But in Cambridge, such distant cues are masked by the nearer cacophony of commuters and scholarly discourse; here a shy little man stood astride the world of theory for half a century. He responded to everything, near and distant, in the same manner: in his own time, in his own roundabout way, with the inborn assurance of a compass needle centering on true north.

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00838.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTAccording to Professor Habermas, Parsons's later system paradigm is in conflict, to some extent, with his earlier action paradigm, as Menzies contended; but Parsons concealed the conflicts from himself, Habermas thinks, and retained his “cultural determinism” and “secret idealism.” According to Habermas, Parsons lacked any adequate equivalent of the concept of a “life world” built up on the basis of intersubjective communication. Parsons's unrealistic assumption of harmony between actors' orientations on the one hand and functional requirements of systems on the other prevented him, according to Habermas, from seeing what Marx for example saw, namely that in modern society the symbolic life worlds of actors suffer distortion because of their subordination to the rationalizing tendencies of money and power. (Professor Habermas did not provide an abstract for this translation of his address on Parsons, which he delivered to the German Sociological Association in 1980. Readers are urged to regard this abstract as only suggestive and as inadequately reflecting a complex argume

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00839.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTParsons's analysis of Marx and its conclusion that Marx was a utilitarian are criticized. I endeavor to demonstrate that Marx succeeded in avoiding the pitfalls of both idealism and positivism and that he must be viewed as the founder of the voluntaristic theory of social action. In addition, I contend that this categorization makes a difference; if we incorporate Marx into action theory, build action theory on a Marxian foundation, certain problems within Parsons's work can be resolved. I illustrate this contention in a discussion of the relationship between structural and functional theory.“An earnest warning is given against… premature claims to finality. The author has been more or less intensively concerned with the major works of the men treated in this study over periods ranging from six to ten years. After considerable periods of occupation in other fields, he has come back to intensive reconsideration of their works. Every time this reconsideration brought to light fundamentally important things about them which had been missed before. The most important points, for the purposes of this study, were not understood at the first reading, but generally only after repeated consideration.” (Parsons, 19

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00840.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

In recent years concepts drawn from linguistics have been used increasingly in social and political theory. Such concepts as deep structure, surface structure, transformation rules, etc., are borrowed from Chomsky's theory of transformational‐generative grammar. This paper examines two instances of this “linguistic drift” in action theory‐the work of Marshall Edelson on personality and Terrence Turner on kinship and socialization. Analysis shows that in these instances the analogies with the linguistic concepts are not very rigorous. The author makes some tentative statements about the current status and prospects of such research p

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00841.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTA common criticism of Parsonian theory has been that it is really not a theory but only a classificatory scheme. Critics claim that its concepts are not amenable to operationalization and that low‐level empirically testable hypotheses cannot be derived from the theory. We argue that: (I) These criticisms are based upon a limited concept of theory, one that neglects other important functions that theory performs. (2) Many concepts in Parsonian theory can and have been operationalized. (3) Empirically testable propositions can be deduced from Parsons's theory. Examples from the areas of social evolution, criminology, small groups, and the self are discusse

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00842.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTThe “conflict school” in contemporary sociology emerged in large part as a critique of the theory of social change that Talcott Parsons developed during his middle period, which began with the empiricallyoriented essays that appeared after The Structure of Social Action(Parsons, 1937), and extended through the simultaneous publication ofTowards a General Theory of Action(Parsons and Shils, 1951) andThe Social System(Parsons, 1951). The conflict critique, now enshrined in textbook lore and highbrow writing alike, accused Parsons of a static, idealist bias that ignored issues of process, conflict, and change. While Parsons's attitude toward change, during this and later periods of his development, was complex and often ambiguous, this evaluation was certainly incorrect. I will demonstrate, in fact, that in this middle period Parsons actually produced a more systematic and compelling approach to conflict and change than the theories produced by the conflict critics themselves.In the first part of this paper, I will present the formal elements of Parsons's change theory. The second part will add substance to this theory by showing how Parsons applied it to the empirical problematics of recent Western development. In the third section, I will relate this formal and substantive theorizing to the vastly misunderstood deviance paradigm from The Social System.In conclusion, I will return to the question with which I began: What is the real relationship between the conflict theorists and their very useful straw man, “Talcott Pars

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00843.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTOrganized in three parts, this paper I. summarizes Parsons's analysis of fascism and National Socialism written during the 1940s; II. places his work into the context of earlier and later theories of fascism; and III. suggests how Parsons's later theoretical work may aid our under standing of National Socialism.

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00844.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

ABSTRACTIn this essay, socialization and personality development are put in the context of the central issue of voluntaristic action theory–namely, the conditions under which the integration of social order and individual autonomy is possible. The theory of the interpenetration of man's basic organic structure and his natural, social, and cultural environments constitutes the essence of the answer to this problem in voluntaristic action theory. This theoretical core of voluntaristic action theory has its roots in Kant's critical philosophy. Emile Durkheim provided this theory with its first specific formulation concerning the question of the relationship between socialization and personality development. This formulation shows a clear convergence with the writings of other classic authors on socialization theory. The first part of this study aims to elucidate Durkheim's contribution, with side‐glances at other classic theorists to show points of agreement with him. In the second part, socialization and personality development will be dealt with systematically. Finally, in the third part, various forms of deviation from the ideal case of the integration of social order and individual autonomy will be treated: the types of malintegration between individual and society and the constellation of their cau

ISSN:0038-0245    

DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682X.1981.tb00845.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY