Just listened to commentary from Sheldon Richman where he said that Peter Berger had a unique perspective for his discipline and that most sociologists see society like The Borg.
My head is aching from the absurdity of both components this remark.
Monday, June 17, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Off topic but lets see if the Libertarians understand that Salinas v. Texas is a bigger threat to the Constitution and civil liberties than PRISM.
ReplyDeleteCato filed a brief in favor of silence:
Delete~For several reasons, the Cato amicus brief argues that prosecutors should not be able to comment on a citizen’s silence at trial. First, under our adversarial system, the government must investigate its own case, find its own witnesses, and prove its own facts. That means citizens can (in the absence of a subpoena) choose to cooperate with police fully, partly, or not at all. Second, silence is not evidence of guilt. Thus, there is no valid reason to support the government’s bid for admissibility (at least in the prosecution’s case-in-chief). Third, a contrary ruling would complicate the law and confuse citizens about when they can remain silent in the face of police questioning.~
http://www.cato.org/publications/legal-briefs/salinas-v-texas
Where is this commentary?
ReplyDeletePanel discussing Boettke's "Living Economics" at Cato - deep in during the Q&A and not during his initial statement. I'll try to track it down for you.
DeleteThat wasn't a paraphrase - he referenced The Borg. That might just be poetic license (hopefully his take on sociology wasn't that simplistic - but I've met many who genuinely think that's the case), but what really stunned me was that he treated Berger as some kind of voice crying out in the wilderness among sociologists.
The 28712 citations* of Berger/Luckmann "The social construction of reality" are obviously all self-citations.
Delete(*as measured by Google Scholar)
He's clearly riffing on this article: http://www.firstthings.com/print/article/2007/01/whatever-happened-to-sociology--43
ReplyDeletePeter L. Berger indeed has a bunch of harsh things to say about the field of Sociology.
Peter L. Berger was making similar comments as early as 1992: http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/berger-peter_sociology-a-disinvitation-1992.html
ReplyDeleteYou're not a sociologist right Daniel? So shouldn't this post be titled, "I disagree strongly with Sheldon Richman"?
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't think so, although I've got as many degrees in sociology as I have in economics and I would probably call myself an economist, I work regularly with a sociologist, and I read the stuff. But even granted that I think my title works fine. If I were referring to myself with a similar title it would just be "Talking outside your discipline win"!
DeleteI'm not a physicist either (and I have quite a bit fewer degrees in physics than in economics or sociology) but if someone heard something once about string theory and told me that physics was all about how the matter is made up of rubber bands and yarn I'd feel pretty comfortable attaching the "fail" meme to that one too.
Well, clearly Sheldon Richman was riffing off something Peter L. Berger already noted (quite famously at this point) about his discipline (or former discipline), so I'm not quite sure what your source of complaint is here.
DeletePeter Berger is a major sociologist that is widely cited.
DeleteA lot of scholars like to cultivate an outsider persona. You see this in economics among celebrated Nobel laureates too.
The source of the comment is that I'm decently familiar with the literature and both contentions are wrong.
If there were a Nobel prize in sociology there is absolutely no doubt at all Peter Berger would have one. He's not some kind of shunned figure. It's probably a combination of some scholars liking to cultivate maverick self-images and I wouldn't be surprised at all if some Marxians took issue with his pro-market stance and it stuck with him. None of that translates to the claims made.
DeleteDaniel Kuehn,
Delete~None of that translates to the claims made.~
All Richman is doing IMO is condensing Berger's own sentiments. Of course you could ask Berger himself, he has a blog and all that. Whatever the case certainly Richman is drawing heavily on Berger's comments about the field, so his comments aren't nearly as "out there" as you describe them as being.