Suchergebnisse

No methodological critique should be seen as an attack on an existing study. Rather such critiques should be seen as a call to a community of scholars to re- examine or reassess work that may have seemed "finished." In view of the rela tively low esteem accorded to sport sociology (at least in the United States) it may be proper to emphasize that the problems discussed above are by no means limited to the area of sport sociology. Indeed, they are to be found in the most respectable literature of fields more in the "mainstream" of sociology (see Deutscher, 1973; Hirschi and Selvin, 1967). Hopefully, a continuing concern for better methodology among sport sociologists will help us to draw on the methodological wisdom of "general sociology" and other related fields without repeating the errors that have been made by scholars in those fields. A number of recent papers and exchanges in this journal and elsewhere have marked an apparent growth of interest in methodological issues among sport socio logists (e.g., Loy and Seagrave, 1974; Albonico and Pfister-Binz, 1971; McPherson, 1975: Wohl, 1975). This trend, especially the emergence of exchanges and discus sions regarding the relative merit of different methodological approaches (cf. Wohl, 1975 and McPherson, 1975; Lenk and Lüschen, 1975), may be seen as a sign of maturation of sport sociology as a field of inquiry. Given the nature of sport sociology such exchanges also provide an opportunity for cross-national and cross- disciplinary communication that is, perhaps, unparallelled in any other social science field. The purpose of this paper is to review some of the more significant works in the field in terms of certain methodological problems they present. It should be noted at this time that this review could not be comprehensive given the extensive literature that exists. The material selected is characterized by two general criteria: 1) it is important in terms of its substantive or theoretical content; 2) it represents an interesting methodological problem. Hopefully this paper will contribute to the apparent growth in consciousness of methodological issues among sport sociolo gists — and, perhaps further exchanges as well.

For more than two decades, economists & sociologists have pursued parallel cross-national quantitative investigations of the determinants of economic development. These investigations have proceeded in mutual ignorance despite the often-large overlap in statistical methods & data employed. Apparently contradictory findings have resulted, especially regarding the impact of international trade & foreign direct investment. We find that there are two factors that account for these inconsistent results. One key factor is the use of different variables to measure international trade & investment, the choice of which is in turn driven by underlying differences in theoretical motivations. A second important difference involves sociologists' greater preoccupation with more complex multivariate models vs economists' greater willingness to focus on individual variables in multivariate regressions while viewing others as "controls." A major finding of our survey is that when the same variables are used, the results of economists & sociologists tend to be consistent, rather than contradictory (as might have occurred, for example, because of the use of different samples of countries or time periods, or the use of other variables included in the regression equations). We also consider some studies whose purviews go beyond economic growth to consider factors such as income inequality, physical quality of life, demographic change, & basic needs provision. 4 Appendixes, 83 References. Adapted from the source document.

Literature is defined as an art that develops in human society throughout the ages quite independently of sociol, whereas sociol is a sci whose purpose is to discover objective laws of soc life in all its manifestations, including creative art. The main diff between literature & the other arts is that the subject of literature is syncretic. It is held that literature lends itself more than any other art to sociol'al study. The sociol'at must try to solve the general problems concerning the nature of literature as an art & its place in the historical development of society. Literature is related to the general laws of art, & the ideological essence of art is discussed. Literature is a special form of intellectual creation which uses a special form of imagination. This imagination creates images that transform human life in a specific & expressive manner, both in the relations of its objective soc being & in the subjective world of its soc consciousness. Ideology as expressed in literature does not simply represent people's intellectual convictions or their ideas about life-it also embraces the feelings & aspirations engendered by those convictions & ideas. It is found not only in the form of theories, but is primarily a direct, emotional & total awareness of the diff manifestations of soc life. All creative artists strive to express their emotional interpretation of life in graphic & expressive images in their works because it is their ideological interpretation of life, imbued with emotion & pathos. Consequently the soc substructure of an artistic creation can explain the peculiarities of the content & form of certain works & the history of the development of all types of art throughout the world. E. Weiman.

In the novel of Tsuboi Sakae titled Nijuushi no Hitomi, the are many conditions ofJapanese society at World War II (1939-1945) that can be known.They had to strugle forliving, there were many social problems that had to be faced. Social discrepancy and povertyforced each of family member work harder to survive. The method which is used in thisresearch is descriptive method, and the theory that is used in this research is the literaturesociology and sociology. The many social problems that is happened in Japan that is causedby economic problem, politic, and Japanese culture it self. The first problem is poverty: thekids can not enjoy education any more; starvation disister makes the parents sell theirdaughter to keep alive; The men follow military academy. The second problem is familydisorganization that is happened to Japanese people at World War II: It changes a daughterbecome a mother; father and each son from the family must go to fight at war. Theseproblems make a new serious problem in family environment it is a disunion of the family,because they can not fill their roll as family member. The third problem is the violation ofnorms at World War II: The parents force their daughter to work at prostitution; also viewJapanese poeple are influenced by west culture.Keywords: Japanes society, World War II, social problem.

AbstractSociology can be both a science and literature. While sociology as science investigates general tendencies of social phenomena through statistical analysis and advances social policies based on the understanding of their objective causes, sociology as literature focuses on the non‐generalizable aspects of an individual event and considers the reasons for the resulting actions of human beings. In this article I examine prominent works in the sociology of literature by three representative Japanese sociologists, Sosuke Mita, Keiichi Sakuta and Shun Inoue, from the 1970s to the early 1980s. After this period, contemporary French philosophy, such as that of Foucault, introduced to Japan during the 1980s, made it clear that literature is nothing more than a social institution that produces interiority in individuals. As a result, sociology as discourse has dominated the intellectual scene in Japan ever since, eclipsing the possibility of sociology as literature, which focuses more on the romantic individual. However, I argue that an alternative possibility for sociology as literature can be found in a sociology of singularity, which grasps the concrete facticity of human activities in ordinary everyday life through reading their descriptions in works of literature.

"The Sociology of Literature is a pithy primer to the history, affordances, and potential futures of this growing field of study, which finds its origins in the French Enlightenment, and its most salient expression as a sociological pursuit in the work of Pierre Bourdieu. Addressing the epistemological premises of the field at present, the book also refutes the common criticism that the sociology of literature does not take the text to be the central object of study. From this rebuttal, Gisèle Sapiro, the field's leading theorist, is able to demonstrate convincingly one of the greatest affordances of the discipline: its in-built methods for accounting for the roles and behaviors of agents and institutions (publishing houses, prize committees, etc.) in the circulation and reception of texts. While Sapiro emphasizes the rich interdisciplinary nature of the approach on display, articulating the way in which it draws on literary history, sociology, postcolonial studies, book history, gender studies, and media studies, among others, the book also stands as a defense of the sociology of literature as a discipline in its own right"--