Download Free Founders Classics And The Concept Of A Canon Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Founders Classics And The Concept Of A Canon and write the review.

Founders, classics, and canons have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology's identity. Within the academy today, a number of positions feminist, postmodernist, postcolonial question the status of "tradition."In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr defends the continuing importance of sociology's classics and traditions in a university education. Baehr offers arguments against interpreting, defending, and attacking sociology's great texts and authors in terms of founders and canons. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be "founded" and why the term "founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of "canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken.Although he questions the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning these concepts have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or attack the liberal university tradition.
"Founders, classics, and canons have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology's identity. Within the academy today, a number of positions--feminist, postmodernist, postcolonial-- question the status of "tradition." In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr defends the continuing importance of sociology's classics and traditions in a university education. Baehr offers arguments against interpreting, defending, and attacking sociology's great texts and authors in terms of founders and canons. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be "founded" and why the term "founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of "canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken. Although he questions the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning these concepts have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or attack the liberal university tradition."--Provided by publisher.
Founders, classics, and canons have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology's identity. Within the academy today, a number of positions?feminist, postmodernist, postcolonial?question the status of "tradition."In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr defends the continuing importance of sociology's classics and traditions in a university education. Baehr offers arguments against interpreting, defending, and attacking sociology's great texts and authors in terms of founders and canons. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be "founded" and why the term "founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of "canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken.Although he questions the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning these concepts have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or attack the liberal university tradition.
Founders, classics, and canons have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology’s identity. Within the academy today, a number of positions—feminist, postmodernist, postcolonial—question the status of “tradition." In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr defends the continuing importance of sociology’s classics and traditions in a university education. Baehr offers arguments against interpreting, defending, and attacking sociology’s great texts and authors in terms of founders and canons. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be “founded" and why the term “founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of “canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken. Although he questions the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning these concepts have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or attack the liberal university tradition.
Three categories-founders, classics, canons-have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology's precarious identity, defining the discipline's sense of its past and the implications for its current activity. Today that identity is being challenged as never before. Within the academy, a number of positions-feminist, postmodernist, poststructuralist, postcolonial-converge in questioning the status of "the tradition." These currents, in turn, reflect wider social questioning about the meaning and uses of knowledge in technologically advanced societies. In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr scrutinizes the nature of this challenge. He provides a model of the processes through which texts are elevated to classic status, and defends the continuing importance of sociology's traditions for a university education in the social sciences. The concept of "classic" is, as Baehr notes, a complex one. Essentially it assumes a scale of judgment that deems certain texts as exemplary in eminence. But what is the nature of this eminence? Baehr analyzes various responses to this question. Most notable are those that focus on the functions classics perform for the scholarly community that employs them; the rhetorical force classics are said to possess; and the processes of reception that result in classic status. The concept of classic is often equated with two other notions: "founders" and "canon." The former has a well-established pedigree within the discipline, but widespread usage of the latter in sociology is much more recent and polemical in tone. Baehr offers arguments against these two ways of interpreting, defending and attacking sociology's great texts and authors. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be "founded" and why the term "founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of "canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken. While questioning the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr's purpose is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning they have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or excoriate the liberal university tradition. In examining the tactics of this battle, this volume offers a model of how social theory can be critical rather than radical. Peter Baehr teaches in the department of politics and sociology, Lingnan University, Hong Kong. His previous book for Transaction, Caesar and the Fading of the Roman World, was designated an "Outstanding Academic Book" by Choice.
While Nietzsche’s influence on philosophy, literature and art is beyond dispute, his influence on sociology is often called into question. A close textual analysis of Nietzsche’s works and those of important sociologists – Max and Alfred Weber, Ferdinand Tönnies, Rosa Mayreder – provides the first comprehensive account of their study and use of Nietzsche’s writings. Above all, Nietzsche’s critique of modernity, morality and culture are shown to have had a decisive influence on the development of sociology and the work of its leading thinkers at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th.
This is an accessible, enlivening introductory book that provides a shot in the arm for all those who maintain the relevance of sociology for understanding the modern world. Charles Turner provides a wealth of concrete examples which demonstrate what a sociological perspective can do to unpack and illuminate everyday life. The book allows students to understand sociological theory from the inside. It moves effortlessly beyond the mere parade of great names and core ideas to introduce concepts that can be used to understand the social world in which we live, where this world has come from and where it might be heading. Original, informed, and deftly written with the needs of students in mind this book is an antidote to arid theorizing and the dull recitation of the grand sociological tradition.
This volume contains the papers read at the Leiden Conference on Canonization and Decanonization of 9-10 January 1997. The emphasis in this rich and wide-ranging contribution to the subject is on the processes of canonization and decanonization in several religions and on the phenomenon of religious canons as well. It has two sections: (De)canonization and the History of Religions, and (De)canonization and Modern Society. In the first section processes out of which canons eventually emerge are highlighted in contributions devoted to particular religions, viz. African religions, Judaism and Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. The articles of the second section are of particular relevance to the contemporary situation in the western world, dealing with aspects such as forms of the survival of a canon in processes of modernization, canonization and the challenge of plurality, and canonization and hermeneutics. The reader may benefit even more from this volume as it contains also An Annotated Bibliography on the subject.
In Model Cases, Monika Krause asks about the concrete material research objects behind shared conversations about classes of objects, periods, and regions in the social sciences and humanities. It is well known that biologists focus on particular organisms, such as mice, fruit flies, or particular viruses when they study general questions about life, development, and disease. Krause shows that scholars in the social sciences and humanities also draw on some cases more than others, selecting research objects influenced by a range of ideological but also mundane factors, such as convenience, historicist ideas about development over time, schemas in the general population, and schemas particular to specific scholarly communities. Some research objects are studied repeatedly and shape our understanding of more general ideas in disproportionate ways: The French Revolution has profoundly influenced our concepts of revolution, of citizenship, and of political modernity, just like studies of doctors have set the agenda for research on the professions. Based on an extensive analysis of the role of model cases in different fields, Krause argues that they can be useful for scholarly communities if they are acknowledged and reflected as particular objects; she also highlights the importance of research strategies based on neglected research objects and neglected combinations of research objects and scholarly concerns.
Providing an authoritative guide to theory and method, the key sub-disciplines and the primary debates in contemporary sociology, this work brings together the leading authors to reflect on the condition of the discipline.