PROMETHEUS BOUND: THE LIMITS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE PROFESSIONALIZATION IN THE PROGRESSIVE PERIOD.

This article presents a critique of the professionalization view, and examines several case studies pointing toward an interpretation that sees the social scientist at the turn of the century drawn by stick and carrot into a role definition of expertise in the service of power. It also outlines a notion of "role complementarity" as an alternative to professionalizations. The most important problem, and the one that argues decisively against professionalization theory, involves the theory's incomplete analysis of resource exchange and power. For the new social scientists, the provision of resources was the critical issue, as their method of discourse required nothing less than the industrialization of social science expertise. There are a number of extremely difficult problems raised by the use of professionalization theory. The explanation reflects the views of the triumphant social scientists, views endlessly reproduced and expanded by those trained by the victors. Professionalization theory is a congratulatory occupational self-justification becoming an ideology for all mental workers.