PUTTING SOCIAL SCIENCE TO WORK IS A RISKY UNDERTAKING

In: Social science quarterly, Volume 51, Issue 4, p. 854-859

Abstract

A rebuttal of critics of his book, THE UNHEAVENLY CITY (see SA 1218/F6394), on the grounds that it made no claim to be a work of soc sci but rather 'an attempt by a soc sci'st to think about the problems of the cities in the light of scholarly findings.' Critics cited are: R. L Lampman (see SA 2757/ F6755), P. H. Rossi (see SA 1218/F6419), S. Greer (see SA 1218/F6403), C. B. Stokes (see SA 2757/F6757), & R. E. Agger (see SA 1019/F6313). There was no desire to manipulate the reader into a policy position, not to mention an ideological one. The critics' viewpoints are distorted by their pot. It is the use of soc sci methods & theories, not as they suppose the expression of conservative or reactionary prejudices, that led to the conclusions they deplore. The task of a soc sci'st Is to clarify certain kinds of intellectual problems, not to make judgments as to the pol'al consequences that may follow from their clarification. If pol'al bias is to be charged, it ought to be charged against a sociol'st who maintains that the outlook & style of life into which the individual has been soc'ized can be greatly changed in a short period of time merely by changing his job, income, & other material circumstances. Such changes may be necessary conditions for changing the individual's outlook & life style but they are not likely to be sufficient ones. M. Duke.