社会学

出版时间：2010-1  出版社：北京大学出版社  作者：[英] 安东尼·吉登斯  页数：1058  
Tag标签：无  

内容概要

这是一部畅销二十多年的教科书。第6版为社会学概论课建立了新的规范。该书适合大学一年级学生适用，并有助于培养新一代的社会学家。本书的基调是将社会学视为在现代思想文化中的扮演着核心的角色以及在社会科学中占据着中心位置的学科。

作者简介

安东尼·吉登斯(Anthony Giddens，1938年-)英国社会学家，曾任剑桥大学教授和伦敦经济政治学院院长。主要著作有《第三条道路》、《社会的构成》和《现代性与自我认同》等。其中，“第三条路”(Third way)的思想影响了英国等国家的政策。

书籍目录

Detailed contentsPreface to the sixth editionAcknowledgementsAbout this bookList of figuresList of tablesList of boxes1 What is Sociology?2 Asking and Answering Sociological Questions3 Theories and Perspectives in Sociology4 Globalization and the ChangingWorld5 The Environment6 Cities and Urban Life7 Social Interaction and Everyday Life8 The Life-Course9 Families and Intimate Relationships10 Health, Illness and Disability11 Stratification and Social Class12 Poverty, Social Exclusion andWelfare13 Global Inequality14 Sexuality and Gender15 Race, Ethnicity and Migration16 Religion17 The Media18 Organizations and Networks19 Education20 Work and Economic Life21 Crime and DevianceReferencesGlossaryIllustration credits

章节摘录

　　In contrast to many symbolic interactionist, phenomenological and ethn omethodological studies, the work of Max Weber appears to sit much more closely to the mainstream of sociology. Although he certainly was interested in social interactions and the micro level of social life, Weber's work on world religions, economic sociology and legal systems was also historically informed, strongly comparative in orientation and concerned with the overall development and direction of the modern world. This is in contrast to the interactionist tradition as it developed after Weber's death, which has become rather more exclusively focused on the micro level during the twentieth century.　　Theoretical dilemmas　　Controversies sparked by the work of the classical theorists, as well as by the later theoretical ideas and perspectives discussed above, continue today. But since the time of the classical sociologists, it has become commonplace to argue that their work, and that of sociology in general, has set up a series of theoretical dilemmas.　　There are several basic theoretical dilemmas - matters of continuing or recurring controversy or dispute - which these clashes of viewpoint bring to our attention, some of which concern very general matters to do with how we should interpret human actMties and social mstitutions. In short, these are questions about how we can or should 'do' sociology. We shall outline four such dilemmas here.　　1 One dilemma concerns human action and social structure. The issue is the following: how far are we creative human actors, actively controlling the conditions of our ownlives? Oris most of what we do the result of general social forces outside our control? This issue has always divided, and continues to divide, sociologists. Weber and the symbolic interactionists, for example, stress the active, creative components of human behaviour. Other approaches, such as that of Durkheim and functionalism, emphasize the constraining nature of socialinfluences on our free actions.　　2 A second theoretical controversy concerns consensus and conflictin society. Some standpoints in sociology, as we have seen - including functionalism emphasize the inherent order and harmony o-f human societies. Those taking this view regard continuity and consensus as the most evident characteristics of societies, however much they may change over time. Other sociologists, such as Marxists, accentuate the pervasiveness of social conflict. They see societies as plagued with divisions, tensio ns and struggles. To them, it is illusory to claim that people tend to live amicably with one another most of the time; even when there are no open confrontations, they say, there remain deep divisions of interest, which at some point are liable to break out into active conflicts.　　3 There is a third basic theoretical dilemma which hardly figures at all in the orthodox traditions of sociology, but which cannot be ignored. This is the problem of how we are to incorporate a satisfactory understanding of gender within sociological analysis. The founding figures of sociology were all men, as we saw in chapter 1, and they paid virtually no attention to the fact that human beings are gendered. Even those women who were involved in sociology were, until recently, largely neglected. In the works of the early male sociologists, human individuals appear as if they were 'neuter' - they are abstract 'actors', rather than differentiated women and men. Since we have verylittle to build on in relating issues of gender to the more established forms of theoretical thinking in sociology, this is perhaps, at the current time, the most acutely difficult problem to grapple with.　　One of the main theoretical dilemmas associated with gender is the following: should we build 'gender' as a general category into our sociological thinking? Or, alternatively, do we need to analyse gender issues by breaking them down into more specific influences affecting the behaviour of women and men in different contexts? We can put this in another way: are there characteristics that separate men and women, in terms of their identities and social behaviour, in all cultures? Or are gender differences always to be explained mainly in terms of other differences which divide societies (such as class divisions)?　　4 A fourth problem concerns not so much the general characteristics of human behaviour or of societies as a whole, but rather features of modern social development. It is to do with the determining influences affecting the origins and nature of modern societies, and derives from the differences between nonMarxist and Marxist approaches. The dilemma centres on the following issue: how far has the modern world been shaped by the economic factors which Marx singled out - in particular, the mechanisms of capitalist economic enterprise? How far, on the other hand, have other influences - such as social, political or cultural factors - shaped social development in the modern era? These controversies are so fundamental for sociological theory that we shall consider the different ideas developed about them in some detail.　　　Social structure and human action 　　A major theme pursued by Durkheim, and many other sociologists since, is that the societies of which we are members exert social constraint over our actions. Durkheim argued that society has primacy over the individual person. Society is far more than the sum of individual acts; it has a 'firmness' or 'solidity' comparable to structures in the material environment.　　Think of a person standing in a room with several doors. The structure of the room constrains the range of her or his possible activities. The siting of the walls and the doors, for example, defines the routes of exit and entry. Social structure, according to Durkheim, constrains our activities in a parallelway, setting limits to what we can do as individuals. It is 'external' to us, just as the walls of the room are.　　This point of view is expressed by Durkheim in a famous statement: When I perform my duties as a brother, a husband or a citizen and carry out the commitments I have entered into, I fulfil obligations which are defined in law and custom and which are external to myself and my actions……Similarly, the believer has discovered from birth, ready fashioned, the beliefs and practices of his religious life; if they existed before he did, it follows that they exist outside him. The systems of signs that I employ to express my thoughts, the monetary system I use to pay my debts, the credit instruments I utilize in my commercial relationships, the practices I followin my profession, etc. - all function independently of the use I make ofthem. (1982 [1895])　　Although the type of view Durkheim expresses has many adherents, it has also met with sharp criticism. What is 'society',the critics ask, if it is not the composite of many individual actions? If we study a group, we do not see a collective entity, only indMduals interacting with one another in various ways. What we call 'society' is only an aggregate of many indMduals behaving in regular ways in relation to each other.According to the critics, including most sociologists influenced by symbolic interactionism, as human beings we have reasons for what we do, and we inhabit a social world permeated by cultural meanings.　　Social phenomena, according to them, are precisely notlike 'things:　but depend on the symbolic meanings with which we invest what we do. We are not the creatures of society, but its creators.　　It is unlikely that this controversy will ever be fully resolved, since it has existed since modern thinkers first started systematically to try to explain human behaviour. Moreover,it is a debate which is not just confined to sociology, but preoccupies scholars in all fields of the social sciences. You must decide, in the light of your reading of this book, which position you think more nearly correct.　　Yet the differences between the two views can be exaggerated. While both cannot be wholly right, we can fairly easily see connections between them. Durkheim's view is clearly in some respects valid. Socialinstitutions do precede the existence of any given individual; it is also evident that they exert constraint over us. Thus, for example, I did not invent the monetary system which exists in Britain. Nor do I have a choice about whether I want to useit or notifl wish to have the goods and services that money can buy.The system of money, like all other estab lished institutions, exists independently of every individual member of society, and it constrains the activities of each individual.　　On the other hand, it is obviously mistaken to suppose that society is 'external' to us in the same way that the physical world is. For the physical world would go on existing whether or not any human beings were alive, whereas it would plainly be nonsensicalto say this of society.While society is external to each indMdual taken singly, by definition it cannot be external to allindividuals taken together.　　……

用户评论 (总计18条)

•   文字易懂，涵盖内容丰富，虽然不可能细致入微，但是对于社会学入门书籍来说，已经相当不错。一定要买英文版，这样可以免去误译造成的阅读困难和误解。
•   要去牛津读社会学硕士了，先读下这本书。
•   整体来说是本很好的书，印刷质量很高，内容很权威，是学社会学的同学非常值得买的一本书，对英文的阅读能力也有锻炼
•   对社会学有兴趣，算是入门书籍了
•   是正版的书哦~对于社会学的初学者是本很不错的教材，虽然开始的几章看起来有点枯燥无味，因为理论性太强，又有些抽象，不过深入学习以后，对社会学的兴趣会不断提升的！
•   什么是社会，为什么会有黑社会的出现。
•   绝对的经典。五折购入。全新包装完好，运输过程中未有破损。
•   给学校买的，还不错。。。。
•   一定要买的经典之作。
•   就是太厚了，不知道要看到什么时候
•   粗略的翻看了一下，全英文，比想象的容易读。但最近俗务缠身，一等有空，一定完成其阅读。值得一读。
•   英文阅读好挑战啊..
•   图书馆借的书，决定再买一本留存
•   很权威的教材，是社会学的基础书籍。还可以提高英语水平。赞！
•   很好的一本影印。学习社会学专业英语很棒，已阅读，获益匪浅。非常喜欢内页。
•   恩， 不错的一本书，，帮助我们透视一些容易不重视的东西，，
•   全英文对我是个大挑战！
•   如题 与原版相比少了chapter22,23