Hilbert1995
| Hilbert1995 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Hilbert1995 |
| Author(s) | Richard Hilbert |
| Title | Garfinkel's recovery of themes in classical sociology |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Garfinkel, Sociology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1995 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Human Studies |
| Volume | 18 |
| Number | 2-3 |
| Pages | 157–175 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/BF01323208 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In order to derive functionalism from Durkheim and Weber, Parsons had to openly break with some twenty of their theoretical assertions. Express rejections of classical themes lie at the foundation of functionalist sociology. This very foundation is what came unglued by Garfinkel's empirical studies of Parsonian social dynamics. In correcting the inadequacies of functionalism, many of the themes rejected by Parsons have been inadvertently resurrected and developed by ethnomethodologists, albeit in altered form. This is not to say that Garfinkel and classical theorists are saying the same things but rather to point out some historical continuities that have gone largely unrecognized. To recognize these thematic continuities is to gather an improved radical vision of society and social practices. Such perspective also provides new understanding of how and why functionalist theory would arise in the first place, namely as an instance of Weberian rationalization and Durkheimian anomieprevention ritual.
Notes
