DOCSLIB.ORG

October 2016 CURRICULUM VITAE KENNEDY​, ​MICHAEL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
October 2016 CURRICULUM VITAE KENNEDY​, ​MICHAEL October 2016 CURRICULUM VITAE KENNEDY, MICHAEL DAVID ​ ​ Professor of Sociology and International Studies, Brown University ADDRESS Box 1916 Maxcy Hall 112 George Street Providence, RI 02912 Telephone: (401) 863­2367 Fax: (401) 863­3213 [email protected] http://brown.academia.edu/MichaelKennedy EDUCATION Ph.D. (1985) University of North Carolina, Sociology ​ Dissertation: “Professionals and Power in Polish Society” Chairpersons: Gerhard E. Lenski and T. Anthony Jones M.A. (1981) University of North Carolina, Sociology ​ Thesis: “Fiscal Strain in the Central City: Social Capital and Social Expense Expenditure” Chairperson: John D. Kasarda A.B. (1979) Davidson College, Davidson, North Carolina, ​ Sociology and Anthropology PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES Brown University Professor of Sociology and International and Public Affairs, 2009­present Howard R. Swearer Director, Watson Institute for International Studies, 2009­11; Recent Governing and Advisory Boards: Open Society Foundations’ Higher Education Support Program Advisory Board, 2015­18; Chair, 2016­; School of Social Sciences, Singapore Management University International Academic Advisers Panel, 2015­17 CES Network on the Historical Study of States and Regimes Executive Board, 2015­16 Social Science Research Council Board of Directors and Executive Committee ​ ​ Member, 2006­15; Executive Committee Chair, 2008­13; Chair, Presidential Search Committee, 2012 Davis Russian Research Center, Harvard University, Visitors’ Committee Member, 2000­05 ​ ​ Aleksanteri Institute Advisory Board, Helsinki, Finland Member 2003­11 University of Michigan Ronald and Eileen Weiser Professor of European and Eurasian Studies, 2008­09 Vice Provost for International Affairs, 1999­2004 ​ Assistant Professor to Professor of Sociology, 1986­2009 ​ Director of the ​ ● Weiser Center for Europe and Eurasia, Weiser Center for Emerging Democracies, 2008­09 ● International Institute, 1999­2004 ● Advanced Study Center, International Institute, 1999­2000; Co­Convenor, 1994­96 ● Center for Russian and East European Studies, 1995­98, 1999; 2005­2008 ● Center for European Studies/European Union Center 2005­2008 ● Program in the Comparative Study of Social Transformations, 1993­95 The University of South Carolina Visiting Assistant Professor of Sociology, 1985­86 The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Visiting Faculty Member in Sociology, Summer 1986 Teaching Assistant in Sociology, Summers 1983, 1984, 1985 Graduate Assistant in Sociology, 1979­1981 Research Services Ltd., Wembley, Middlesex, England: ​ Research Supervisor, 6/78­8/78 RESEARCH GRANTS ● Planning Grant from the Open Society Foundations’ Information Program for a Workshop on Human Rights and Science (organized by Patrick Ball, Elizabeth Eagen, Michael D. Kennedy, Sarah Knuckey and Meg Sattherthaite) ($25,000) ● Research Grant from the Social Science Research Council, 2010­14 “Engaging Afghanistan” (Shiva Balaghi and Michael D. Kennedy) ($100,000) www.engagingafghanistan.org ● Research Grant from the Luce Foundation, 2010­11 “Assessing Environmental Knowledge Flows” (Michael D. Kennedy, Timmons Roberts and Nancy Jacobs) ($150,000) www.luceenvironment.org ​ ● Research Grant from the European Commission, 2005­2008 ​ ​ “The Cultural Politics of Energy Security” (Michael D. Kennedy and Markku Kivinen) ● Conference Grant from the National Science Foundation, 2004­05 ​ ​ "The Cultural Politics of Globalization and Community in East Central Europe," (Michael D. Kennedy and Genevieve Zubrzycki) ($79,872) ● Research Grant from the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, ​ ​ 1999­2000 2 “Negotiating Revolution in Poland: Conversion and Opportunity in 1989” (Michael D. Kennedy, Brian Porter and Andrzej Paczkowski) ($50,300) http://webapps.lsa.umich.edu/ii/polishroundtable/ ● Research Grant from the United States Institute for Peace, 1999­2000. ​ ​ “Negotiating Radical Change: Understanding and Extending the Lessons of the Polish Round Table Talks” (Michael D. Kennedy and Brian A. Porter) ($30,000). ● Research Grant from the National Council For Soviet and East European Research, ​ “Identity Formation and Environmental and Social Problems in Estonia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan”, 1996­97, Michael D. Kennedy, Barbara Anderson and Oksana Malanchuk ($64,229). ​ ● Grant from the Mellon Foundation for a “Sawyer Seminar” entitled “Social Movements and ​ ​ Social Change in a Globalizing World” in 1995­96 at the Advanced Study Center, International Institute, University of Michigan (Mayer Zald and Michael D. Kennedy) ($100,000). ● USIA Lviv University/University of Michigan Exchange Program, Lectures on Sociology in ​ ​ Lviv, Ukraine, 1993. ● Short Term Travel Grant from IREX to bring Polish sociologist Ireneusz Bialecki to the ​ ​ University of Michigan for collaboration on a project called “Intellectual Authority in Post­Communist Poland”, 1992 ($2,090). ● Research Grant from The National Council for Soviet and East European Research: “The ​ ​ Construction of New Expertise: Education, Professions and Elites in Polish Post­Communism”, 1991­92 (Michael D. Kennedy, Ireneusz Bialecki and Barbara Heyns) ($50,000). ● Faculty Coordinator, “Polish Tour and Study Seminar for College Presidents and Deans”, a grant to the Center for Russian and East European Studies at the University of Michigan from the US Department of Education, 1991 ($40,000). ​ ​ ● Postdoctoral Research Fellowship from the Joint Council on Eastern Europe of the American ​ Council of Learned Societies and Social Science Research Council: “Professionals, ​ Solidarity and Power in Poland,” 1987­88 ($15,000). ● Travel and Coordinating Grant for Poland from the International Research and Exchanges ​ Board (IREX), August 1983­June 1984. ​ ● Graduate Fellowship from the National Science Foundation, 1981­83, 1984­85. ​ ​ University of Michigan Institutional Awards and Major Gifts: ● Private Endowment 2008 The Ronald and Eileen Weiser Center for Europe and Eurasia and the Ronald and Eileen Weiser Center for Emerging Democracies ($11,500,000) (Principal Faculty Contact) ● Program and Research Grant from the European Commission, 2008­11 ​ ​ “European Union Center for Excellence” (276,499 Euro) (Principal Investigator submission) ● Program Grant from the United States Department of Education, 2006­2010 ​ ​ National Resource Center ($925,976) and FLAS Awards ($886,000) for the Center for Russian and East European Studies (Project Director) 3 ● US Department of Education Fulbright­Hays "Doctoral Dissertation Research Abroad" Award (to the II/UM), and ● US Department of Education Fulbright­Hays "Faculty Research Abroad" Award (to the II/UM), 1999­2004 ● 1999­2000 DDRA ($194,388); 2000­2001 DDRA ($186,349); 2001­2002 FRA ($65,000); ● 2001­2002 DDRA ($404,958); 2002­2003 FRA ($114,030); 2002­2003 DDRA ($308,865); ● 2003­2004 DDRA ($311,783) ● Program and Research Grant from the European Commission, 2001­04 ​ ​ “Center for European Union Studies” (in support of Daniel Halberstam, Steven Whiting and Ken Kollman) ($439,617) ● Program and Training Grant from the Alcoa Foundation, 2000­2002 ​ ​ “Science, Professions and Global Diversity” (Michael D. Kennedy, Bradley Farnsworth and Mark Wilson) ($47,000) ● Program, Research and Training Grant from the Ford Foundation, 1999­2003 ​ ​ “Grounding, Translation and Expertise: Revitalizing Area Studies Across the University” (David William Cohen, Michael D. Kennedy and Bruce Mannheim) ($350,000) ● Program Grant from the United States Department of Education, National Resource Center ​ ​ ($537,192) and FLAS Awards ($300,000) for the Center for Russian and East European Studies (Project Director), 1997­2000 (Project Director) ● Research and Training Grant from the Ford Foundation, “Identity Formation and Social ​ ​ Problems in Estonia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan”, 1995­97, Michael D. Kennedy, B. Anderson, T. Hopf, O. Malanchuk, and M. Kamp ($250,000). ACADEMIC HONORS ● A Keynote Address at a conference entitled “The University and Social Development in a World of Global Challenges”, University of Warsaw, June 14, 2016. ● A Keynote Address at a conference entitled “Transition in Retrospect: 25 Years after the Fall of Communism”, University of New York Tirana, Tirana, Albania, 2015 ● Short Term Research Collaboration, Singapore Management University, 2015 ● For Tomasz Zarycki through Foundation for Polish Science, Skills Project, Mentoring, 2014­15 ● The Robin F. Williams Jr. Lecture, Center for the Study of Democracy, University of California, Irvine. March 1, 2013 ● Hungarian Sociological Association Keynote Address, 2012 ● Academic Fellowship Program Non­Resident International Scholar Fellowship, Open Society ​ Foundations, University of Prishtina, Kosova, 2009­13 ​ ● Miami­Florida European Union Center of Excellence Broad Distinguished Lecture Series, 2010 ● University of Michigan National Center for Institutional Diversity, 2009 ​ ​ Distinguished Diversity Scholarship and Engagement Award ● Academic Fellowship Program Non­Resident International Scholar Fellowship, Open Society ​ Institute, Lviv National University, Ukraine, 2008­09 ​ 4 ● Gold Cross of Merit, the Republic of Poland, Presented by President Aleksander ​ ​ Kwasniewski, October 18, 1999. In recognition of contributions to scholarship and education about Poland. ● Foreign Visiting Fellow, Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University, Japan, 1998 ​ ​ (declined). University of North Carolina, Department of Sociology: ● Howard W. Odum Graduate Student Award for Excellence, 1981. ● Honors, Doctoral
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Three Faces of Cruelty: Towards a Comparative Sociology of Violence Author(S): Randall Collins Source: Theory and Society, Vol
    Three Faces of Cruelty: Towards a Comparative Sociology of Violence Author(s): Randall Collins Source: Theory and Society, Vol. 1, No. 4 (Winter, 1974), pp. 415-440 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/656911 Accessed: 12/06/2009 07:41 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Theory and Society. http://www.jstor.org 415 THREE FACES OF CRUELTY: TOWARDS A COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGYOF VIOLENCE RANDALL COLLINS To the comparativesociologist, history shows itself on two levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Pluralism and Sociological Theory
    ASA Theory Section Debate on Theoretical Work, Pluralism, and Sociological Theory Below are the original essay by Stephen Sanderson in Perspectives, the Newsletter of the ASA Theory section (August 2005), and the responses it received from Julia Adams, Andrew Perrin, Dustin Kidd, and Christopher Wilkes (February 2006). Also included is a lengthier version of Sanderson’s reply than the one published in the print edition of the newsletter. REFORMING THEORETICAL WORK IN SOCIOLOGY: A MODEST PROPOSAL Stephen K. Sanderson Indiana University of Pennsylvania Thirty-five years ago, Alvin Gouldner (1970) predicted a coming crisis of Western sociology. Not only did he turn out to be right, but if anything he underestimated the severity of the crisis. This crisis has been particularly severe in the subfield of sociology generally known as “theory.” At least that is my view, as well as that of many other sociologists who are either theorists or who pay close attention to theory. Along with many of the most trenchant critics of contemporary theory (e.g., Jonathan Turner), I take the view that sociology in general, and sociological theory in particular, should be thoroughly scientific in outlook. Working from this perspective, I would list the following as the major dimensions of the crisis currently afflicting theory (cf. Chafetz, 1993). 1. An excessive concern with the classical theorists. Despite Jeffrey Alexander’s (1987) strong argument for “the centrality of the classics,” mature sciences do not show the kind of continual concern with the “founding fathers” that we find in sociological theory. It is all well and good to have a sense of our history, but in the mature sciences that is all it amounts to – history.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Debate
    01-Sernau.qxd 4/11/2005 11:32 AM Page 3 1 The Great Debate An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics. —Plutarch, Greek philosopher (c. 46–120 A.D.) Inequality, rather than want, is the cause of trouble. —ancient Chinese saying The prince should try to prevent too great an inequality of wealth. —Erasmus, Dutch scholar (1465–1536) Consider the following questions for a moment: Is inequality a good thing? And good for whom? This is a philosophical rather than an empirical question—not is inequality inevitable, but is it good? Some measure of inequality is almost universal; inequalities occur everywhere. Is this because inequality is inevitable, or is it just a universal hindrance (perhaps like prejudice, intolerance, ethnocentrism, and violence)? Is inequality necessary to motivate people, or can they be motivated by other factors, such as a love of the common good or the intrinsic interest of a par- ticular vocation? Note that not everyone, even among today’s supposedly highly materialistic college students, chooses the most lucrative profession. Volunteerism seems to be gaining in importance rather than disappearing among college students and recent graduates. Except for maybe on a few truly awful days, I would not be eager to stop teaching sociology and start emptying wastebaskets at my university, even if the compensation for the two jobs were equal. What is it that motivates human beings? 3 01-Sernau.qxd 4/11/2005 11:32 AM Page 4 4 PART I ❖ ROOTS OF INEQUALITY Inequality by what criteria? If we seek equality, what does that mean? Do we seek equality of opportunities or equality of outcomes? Is the issue one the process? Is inequality acceptable as long as fair competition and equal access exist? In many ways, this might be the American ideal.
    [Show full text]
  • Mode of Production and Mode of Exploitation: the Mechanical and the Dialectical'
    DjalectiCalAflthropologY 1(1975) 7 — 2 3 © Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam — Printed in The Netherlands MODE OF PRODUCTION AND MODE OF EXPLOITATION: THE MECHANICAL AND THE DIALECTICAL' Eugene E. Ruyle In the social production of their life, men enter into definite relations that are indispensable and independent of their will, relations of production which correspond to a definite stage of development of their material produc- tive forces. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which rises a legal and political superstruc- ture and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the social, political and intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of men that deter- mines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness.2 The specific economic form, in which unpaid surplus labor is pumped out of the direct producers, determines the relation of rulers and ruled, as it grows immediately out of production itself and in turn reacts upon it as a determining agent. .. It is always the direct relation of the owners of the means of production to the direct producers which reveals the innermost secret, the hidden foundation of the entire social structure.3 In the first of these two passages, Marx in crypto-Marxist bourgeois social science, and appears to be arguing for the sort of techno- then by exploring the possibilities of supple- economic determinism which has become menting the "mode of production" approach increasingly fashionable in bourgeois social with a "mode of exploitation" analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIOLOGY of RELIGION Robert Wuthnow These Readings Will Expose You to the Central Ideas That Have Shaped the Sociology of Relig
    SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION Robert Wuthnow These readings will expose you to the central ideas that have shaped the sociology of religion. The list emphasizes major theoretical and theoretically informed substantive contributions, including some from anthropology and history as well as sociology. The basic readings are starred (*) and should be read carefully. Following each set of basic readings is a short selection of supplementary readings. These are meant to provide more recent and/or advanced understanding of how the core perspective has been extended or applied, or in some cases to suggest alternative approaches and applications. You should pick one of these supplementary readings from each section. In most instances, you may pick either a more theoretically oriented reading or a more empirically oriented study, depending on your interests. Mastering the basic readings and one supplementary reading from each section will give you about 90 percent of what you need to know for the General Examination in sociology of religion. The remaining 10 percent should be composed of recent literature in a sub- area related to your dissertation interests. The reading course will meet each week for one to one and a half hours. Please write and circulate a two-page memo in advance summarizing your thoughts about what you have read and raising questions for discussion. If the week's readings are new to you, focus on the basic readings; if you are already familiar with the basic readings, review them and come prepared to make a short presentation about one of the supplementary readings. For an extensive bibliography and sampling of topics covered in an undergraduate course in sociology of religion, see Meredith McGuire, Religion: The Social Context, 5th ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociocultural Evolution 1 Sociocultural Evolution
    Sociocultural evolution 1 Sociocultural evolution Sociocultural evolution(ism) is an umbrella term for theories of cultural evolution and social evolution, describing how cultures and societies have changed over time. Note that "sociocultural evolution" is not an equivalent of "sociocultural development" (unified processes of differentiation and integration involving increases in sociocultural complexity), as sociocultural evolution also encompasses sociocultural transformations accompanied by decreases of complexity (degeneration) as well as ones not accompanied by any significant changes of sociocultural complexity (cladogenesis).[1] Thus, sociocultural evolution can be defined as "the process by which structural reorganization is affected through time, eventually producing a form or structure which is qualitatively different from the ancestral form.... Evolutionism then becomes the scientific activity of finding nomothetic explanations for the occurrence of such structural changes".[2] Although such theories typically provide models for understanding the relationship between technologies, social structure, the values of a society, and how and why they change with time, they vary as to the extent to which they describe specific mechanisms of variation and social change. Historically, Europeans had tried to explain the meaning of "primitive" societies, with some arguing that primitive peoples had degenerated from a "barbarous" to an even lower "savage" state. These observers often saw European society as symbolizing the highest state of "civilization."[3] Over time, important commentators like Edward Burnett Tylor, Lewis Henry Morgan, Franz Boas, Leslie White, and Julian Steward elaborated on this thinking with theories from unilinear evolution to the "culture history" approach.[3] Sociocultural modeling[4] is an umbrella term for theories of cultural and social evolution, which aims to describe how cultures and societies have developed over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Gerhard Lenski Some False Oppositions
    For Sociological Theory, 2004 Gerhard Lenski, Some False Oppositions, and The Religious Factor Craig Calhoun Isaiah Berlin famously declared that there are two kinds of intellectuals: hedgehogs and foxes. The former have one big idea, stick to it throughout their careers, and find it significant for all issues.1 The latter flit from idea to idea, theme to theme, glorying more in diversity and range than in depth or perseverance. The opposition is illustrative but Gerry Lenski proves it too simple.2 Lenski wrote three great books on three different important subjects: religion, stratification, and social evolution. There is indeed a unifying theme, since all are concerned in significant part with the social organization and implications of inequality. But only one has that as its primary subject. The Religious Factor may say more about 1 'The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing'. The line comes from the Greek poet Archilochus; see Berlin (1953). Berlin originally entitled his essay “Leo Tolstoy’s Historical Skepticism,” but George Weidenfeld suggested the new and vastly more evocative title. “For there exists a great chasm between those, on one side, who relate everything to a single central vision, one system less or more coherent or articulate, in terms of which they understand, think and feel-a single, universal, organizing principle in terms of which alone all that they are and say has significance-and, on the other side, those who pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory, connected, if at all,
    [Show full text]
  • Lenski's Ecological- Evolutionary Theory
    Lenski’s Ecological- Evolutionary Theory By Dr. F. Elwell Note This presentation is based on the theories of Gerhard Lenski as presented in his works. A more complete summary of his theories (as well as the theories of other macro-theorists) can be found in Macrosociology: The Study of Sociocultural Systems, by Frank W. Elwell. If you would like to receive a .pdf file of the chapter on Lenski please write me at [email protected] and put Lenski.pdf in the subject line. Gerhard Lenski Evolutionary Perspectives . Largely fallen into disuse in sociology since Spencer and the social Darwinists. Gerhard Lenski was one of the first to go against this trend. Since the mid-1960s Lenski has been developing an ecological- evolutionary theory that is broad is scope. Induction/Deduction His method is both deductive and inductive. Taking elements of classical theory as his starting point, he then examines empirical findings (ethnographies, histories, and comparative sociology) and modifies his theory accordingly. Ecological-Evolutionary Theory The deductive part of the theory begins from the insights of T. Robert Malthus, an economist and demographer of the early nineteenth century. From Malthus Lenski borrows the observation that human societies are part of the world of nature. Ecological-Evolutionary Theory Like all life forms humans have a reproductive capacity that substantially exceeds the necessary subsistence resources in the environment. Thus, Lenski concludes, human populations tend to grow until they come up against the limits of food production, and then they are checked. Ecological-Evolutionary Theory Like Spencer before him, Lenski insists that sociocultural evolution is but a special case of the general evolutionary process.
    [Show full text]
  • From Marxist Revolution to Technological Revolution Changes in the Interpretation of Social Reality in Eastern Europe in the Eyes of Gerhard Lenski
    DEBATE From Marxist Revolution to Technological Revolution Changes in the interpretation of social reality in Eastern Europe in the eyes of Gerhard Lenski JAKUB PATOČKA* Masaryk University, Brno Abstract: In 1996, an paper by Gerhard Lenski appeared in the Czech Sociological Review entitled, “Ecological-Evolutionary Theory and Societal Transformation in Post-Communist Europe”. This article is a critical response to it and what the author sees as Lenski’s changing and flawed interpretation of social reality, as can be fol- lowed in his work dating back to 1978. The author criticises Lenski’s theoretical perspectives, and also the scientific methods by which he arrives at his “Ecological- Evolutionary Theory”. Czech Sociological Review, 1998, Vol. 6 (No. 1: 115-121) “…the Marxist era of experimentation is far from over. Marxist societies of the early twenty- first century will almost certainly differ from those of the present as much as those of the pre- sent differ from Stalin’s Russia in the nineteen- thirties. Thus, the challenge to sociology to monitor these experiments continues. In fact, I would argue that it becomes more important with each passing year.” [Lenski 1978: 381] With these words, which undoubtedly sound like the gloomy prophecy of Cassandra to a large majority of the inhabitants of the former Soviet bloc, Gerhard Lenski concluded the 1978 essay “Marxist Experiments with Destratification: An Appraisal”. Eighteen years on, his article concerning the social transformation in post-communist Europe was pub- lished in the Czech Sociological Review. This article predicts yet another revolutionary future for our region. In this case, it is not a Marxist future, but instead a technological one [Lenski 1996].
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution and Culture
    Evolution and Culture Edited by Marshall D. Sahlins & Elfman R. Service Forward by Leslie A. White By Thomas G. Harding David Kaplan Marshall D. Sahlins Elman R. Service The University of Michigan Press – Ann Arbor 1960 Neoevolutionism is the movement for which this book, Evolution and Culture, is a primary source. It is a collection of essays. The article that comes before the book summary has the same names in it as the collection, which is also named in the article. The order of the movements leading up to Neoevolutionism go, Evolutionism, Social Darwinism, Functionalism. After comes Diffusionism, Sociobiology Interaction between genetic and Memetics, Siobiology and anthropology, social psychology, economic competition, universal seletion theory. Neoevolutionism Neoevolutionism was the first in a series of modern multilineal evolution theories. It emerged in the 1930s and extensively developed in the period following the Second World War and was incorporated into both anthropology and sociology in the 1960s. It bases its theories on empirical evidence from areas of archaeology, palaeontology and historiography and tries to eliminate any references to systems of values, be it moral or cultural, instead trying to remain objective and simply descriptive.[22] While 19th-century evolutionism explained how culture develops by giving general principles of its evolutionary process, it was dismissed by the Historical Particularists as unscientific in the early 20th century. It was the neo-evolutionary thinkers who brought back evolutionary
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIOLOGY of RELIGION Davidson College Fall Semester, 2010 Course
    ARDA LEARNING RESOURCES Sociology of Religion Syllabus SOC 225: SOCIOLOGY OF RELIGION Davidson College Fall Semester, 2010 Course: Sociology 320 – Sociology of Religion Time and Place: 10:00pm - 11:15am, Tuesdays & Thursdays, Chambers 1006 Prerequisite: None Instructor: Gerardo Marti Phone Number: (704) 894-2481 My Office: Papers turned in outside of class go to Sociology Dept, Preyer 107 Pre-scheduled appointments meet in my office, Preyer 107 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Wednesdays 10:00am – 11:30am and by appointment. For most people, religion is a faith to be lived —or perhaps to be neglected – but for a few, it is also a phenomenon to be studied…. The student of society must be a student of religion; and the student of religion must be a student of society. -- J. Milton Yinger Course Description and Student Outcomes: Religion exists in a social context, and always is shaped by and shapes its social context. Furthermore, religion itself is always (at least in part) a socially constituted reality--that is, its content and structure are always formed, at least partially, out of the "stuff" of the socio-cultural world (language, symbols, groups, norms, interactions, resources, organizations, etc.). The sociology of religion pursues an understanding of both the "social-ness'" of religion itself and the mutually influencing interactions between religion and its social environment. We will analyze religious beliefs, practices, and organizations from a sociological perspective, with a primary focus on religion in contemporary American society. Specifically, this course is designed to: 1. Cultivate in students an understanding of the distinctively sociological approach to studying religion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Debate
    CHAPTER 1 The Great Debate An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics. —Plutarch, Greek philosopher (c. 46–120 A.D.) Inequality, rather than want, is the cause of trouble. —Ancient Chinese saying The prince should try to prevent too great an inequality of wealth. —Erasmus, Dutch scholar (1465–1536) Consider the following questions for a moment: Is inequality a good thing? And good for whom? This is a philosophical rather than an empirical question—not is inequality inevitable, but is it good? Some measure of inequality is almost universal; inequalities occur everywhere. Is this because inequality is inevitable, or is it just a universal hindrance (perhaps like prejudice, intolerance, ethnocentrism, and violence)? Is inequality necessary to motivate people, or can they be motivated by other factors, such as a love of the common good or the intrinsic interest of a particular vocation? Note that not everyone, even among today’s supposedly highly materialistic college students, chooses the most lucrative profession. Volunteerism seems to be gaining in importance rather than disappearing among college students and recent gradu- ates. Except for maybe on a few truly awful days, I would not be eager to stop teach- ing sociology and start emptying wastebaskets at my university, even if the compensation for the two jobs were equal. What is it that motivates human beings? 3 4 ROOTS OF INEQUALITY Inequality by what criteria? If we seek equality, what does that mean? Do we seek equality of opportunities or equality of outcomes? Is the issue one of process? Is inequality acceptable as long as fair competition and equal access exist? In many ways, this might be the American ideal.
    [Show full text]