Search

This paper attempts to demonstrate the growth of class stratification in the collective agriculturaI settlements of Israel. Among the factors discussed are: (1) the place of the collective in the national stratification; (2) the reestablishment of the subordinate role of women; (3) the abandonment of complete democratization of management and leadership; (4) the growth of job specialization; (5) the problem of hired labor and the "exploitation" of auxiliary groups; (6) the development of an age hierarchy; (7) the growth of individualism; and (8) the crystallization of intimate social groups. It is concluded that, although stratification is taking place, the class system developing is still a wide-open one. The attempt of the leadership to combat some of the negative aspects of stratification while maintaining a flexibility in adjusting to changing social conditions is promising. The success of such an adjustment may indicate the lower limits of stratification necessary in a changing society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An earlier paper by H. G. McCurdy and W. E. Lambert described a laboratory arrangement for studying the problem-solving behavior of individuals or small groups, and reported that under certain specified conditions individuals were superior to newly formed groups in such activity and no reliable difference in performance could be detected between randomly composed groups organized, in contrasting fashion, as "democratic" or "dictatorial." With respect to the work reported here, it must be concluded that if any difference among the four types of groups has been demonstrated it is not such as to favor democratic over authoritarian organization for the purpose of problem-solving. It should be pointed out, as it was in the previous article, that more conclusive results might be obtained if it were possible to work with large samples of larger sized groups. Small samples tend to obscure differences unless they are conspicuous and it is possible that group processes which are slight in their effects when the groups are small may become magnified when the groups are enlarged.

This article discusses the book "Readings in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences," edited by May Brodbeck. The author gives attention to three topics discussed in this anthology. The first is the controversy over whether the account of explanation given by sociologist Hempel is applicable in the human as well as in the natural sciences. The second theme in the anthology obviously relevant to sociologist is that of methodological individualism versus holism. Many of the papers in this anthology characterize at one level the alternatives confronting a scientist whose theorizing confronts either empirical or conceptual difficulties. Just because actions are informed by intentions and purposes, and intentions and purposes presuppose beliefs, so a social role-which specifies and prescribes or permits certain courses of action for certain types of person presupposes certain beliefs. The matter of the philosophy of science may not only be regulative as regards the form of our theories and the lessons to be learnt here may well be one that the sociologist now feels have been conveyed to him almost too often-but suggestive as to their content.

The search for uniformities in the growth patterns of individual industries rose to a peak some 30 years ago in the explorations of economists Simon S. Kuznets and in the subsequent comprehensive work of Arthur F. Burns. Partly because of the widespread acceptance of these results and attendant explanations of their inevitability, and partly because of the compelling attractions of other economic problems, little additional work was done in this area for an extended period. Recent portents of a revival of interest stem from three sources: the growing output of long-term forecasts for individual industries, which invites a search for generalizations and efforts to reinvigorate research and theory relating to economic growth by probing the behavior of disaggregated sectors. This paper will concentrate primarily on reviewing Burns's expectations and comparing them with actual results over the following 25 years as a basis for: suggesting revisions in the interpretation of his original findings; outlining needed modifications in the theory as well as the pattern of industrial growth paths; and exploring the possibility of developing patterned expectations for the growth of individual commodities and firms.

The article examines the views of R.H. Tawney, an economic historian on the origins of capitalism. Tawney argued that it is equally over-simplified and one-sided to argue that capitalism had to wait until the Protestant ethic had produced a capitalist spirit or that the Protestant ethic was itself merely the result of the development of capitalism. He never discounted the impact of economic changes on religious thought and practice. But, at the same time, he insisted that the impact of religion upon economic life and behavior could not be dismissed either. Puritans, as well as Catholics, attempted the formidable task of formulating a Christian casuistry of economic behavior. By the 18th century, the pursuit of economic self-interest has been proclaimed the law of nature by the philosophers. The consequent repudiation of the social character and responsibility of religion, aided the development of individualism in all areas of society-economic, social, political. Hard work, frugality, the pursuit of riches as a disposition of man, was created by the historical transformations of the l6th-l8th centuries.

The article presents the author's view on the family system in the U.S. and his predictions regarding possible changes in the system by the end of twentieth century. He says that marriage vows have become anachronistic and have lost much of their meaning. According to him, twentieth century will witness the movement of many values formerly associated with family membership over to the individual.

As divorce rates continue to climb in North America, we find no emergent normative setting to help alleviate extramarital sexual problems within the marital relationship. Although we are faced with increased opportunity to participate in extramarital sexuality, we are still confronted with old and often dysfunctional normative settings to accommodate problems which arise in extramarital sexual expression. A survey of three dare sources, courtroom cases, survey data, and clinical cases, suggests that in general males are heavily socialized in instrumental and aggressive ways. Violence in family conflict seems to be more usual than commonly thought to be the case, in part due to male socialization, heavy individualism, and female passive-aggressive input. Data from court cases and survey data suggest strong male norms of aggressiveness as culturally appropriate, inhibiting good male-female relations at many levels. Those seeking alternatives to conventional marriage enjoin the struggle in the hope of establishing more rational modes of heterosexual interaction: their struggles are often confounded by past socialization, intrusion of sex-seekers, and ambiguity and difficulty with structuring new norms. Means to achieve more rational adaptations are discussed and include recognition of where we are and use of social science knowledge to further humanistic possibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent developments have creased new needs which only the family can meet. Such needs are created by our bureaucratic way of life and the advances of medical and welfare services made available by our government. The resulting functions for marriage partners are (1) orchestration with such institutions as health care services, school system, social security system; (2) management of available time around self-determined priorities; (3) sexual synchronization over an extended life span; (4) economic coordination of the earning rower of two adult earners; (5) outlet for and rescue from hostilities created and suppressed in bureaucratic existence; (6) therapeutic cooperation with the health care service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents some sociological insights into American culture and personality. The cross-disciplinary field of culture and personality changes so rapidly that it is difficult for those in one involved discipline to keep up with what is taking place in others. It is even more difficult to ascertain many of the important implications of those changes. The author of this article attempts a brief exploration of a few of the currently emerging implications of this relativity conception. The implications of white-collar criminality and, even more, of broader conception could shake the very foundations of many persons' conceptions of culture, personality, American society, and human society. Just as the psychopathic is a more or less great distortion of the hypothetical normal, so the criminal who is convicted has a great deal in common with other members of society and reflects accurately aspects of society's culture and subcultures. Sharp trading, getting things done, individualism, being competitive and aggressive, and all the rest are traits drilled into boys and girls in business, factory worker, farm, and military families.

The article discusses the measurement of positive attitude toward science. The development of healthy, positive attitude regarding the scientific enterprise and its practitioners is one of the major responsibilities of science educators at all levels. Central to this task of attitude education is identification and description of the nature of the attitudes to be instilled and the development of instruments with which attitudes may be assessed. The Science Support Scale was designed to assess the extent to which respondents feel positively or negatively toward value dimensions such as rationality, utilitarianism, universalism, individualism and a belief in progress and meliorism.

The article discusses the individualism. Every statement about social phenomena is either a statement about individual human beings or else it is unintelligible and therefore not a statement at all. All statements about social phenomena are translatable without loss of meaning into statements that are wholly about individuals. According to social individualism, society has at its end the good of individuals. In this theory, social institutions are explained as founded and maintained by individuals to fulfil their ends, consciously framed independently of institutions. An individual can have following attributes: genetic make-up; brain states; aggression; gratification; stimulus-response; co-operation; power; esteem; cashing cheques; saluting and voting. With the help these attributes, another form of individualism can be defined which is called as methodological individualism. As F.A. Hayek says that all social phenomena, and especially the functioning of all social institutions, should always be understood as resulting from the decisions, actions, attitudes, etc., of human individuals, and we should never be satisfied by an explanation in terms of so-called collectives.

The article presents arguments of the author which hold that individualism need not be psychologistic and defends institutional individualism which he considers philosopher Karl Popper's greatest to the social sciences. The article presents two traditional views, holism and individualism. The author holds that all explanations within the holistic and psychologistic frameworks can be formulated within Popper's institutionalist-individualist methodology situational logic. All serious social thinkers have employed situational logic even though Popper was the first to formulate it. It was held that institutions can be explained as inter-personal means of co-ordination, as attitudes which are accepted conventionally or by agreement. This idea leaves room for the rational principle of institutional reform. It accords with the classical individualistic idea that social phenomena are but the interactions between individuals.

Traditionally, economist John Locke has been regarded as the John the Baptist, if not the Founding Father, of laissez-faire capitalism and rugged individualism. Such a view ought to have been expressed with caution since the Lockian corpus contains no treatise on economics comparable to, say, economist Adam Smith's book "Wealth of Nations." The author suspects that these labeling of Locke were often based on fragmentary, out-of-context readings. It is the author's view that a reading of the whole of Locke's writings will incline one to a quite different interpretation of his economics. Not that he was a socialist. But neither was he a laissez-faire individualist. Rather his pronouncements on matters economic anticipate in a remarkable way the practical principles of the mid-century American capitalistic society. In an earlier article to which this is a companion piece, the author described and defended Locke's theory of property in a state of nature. Since Locke's critics are chiefly disturbed by the disparity they find between his account of property in the natural state and his account of property in civil society, the author proceeds now to an examination of these charges of inconsistency as well as duplicity and crass materialism.