Basic Rules

FIRST: generate both your own posts and comments on each other's posts. Posts cannot be anonymous. Comments can.

SECOND: experiment with what you say and how you say it, but be sure to respect your fellow classmates.

THIRD: reference your classmates' posts and comments in your own posts and comments. When at all possible, link back to posts.

FOURTH: reference specific portions of the texts we are reading by including the author's last name and page numbers.


Monday, September 24, 2007

theories vs. paradigms

After last weeks discussion about paradigms versus theories I am still confused as to why authors of Sociology textbooks are mixing up these terms. As I stated last class, in my Methods textbook the author referred to theories as paradigms. When I was reading about the founding fathers of Sociology in an introductory textbook I found that theories were again referred to as paradigms. Are we mistaken or are the authors of these textbooks? Why do some authors call these concepts theories and others call them paradigms?

4 comments:

oscar said...

Perhaps the word "paradigm" has become so overused that it no longer means anything? Remind me to tell you all in class tonight about the relationship between a sponge and the term "postmodern."

Ldiaz said...

I found it very funny that after the discussion in class on wether or not 'paradigm shift' is being overused I came across it AGAIN as I was reading for my mass media class.

oscar said...

Ha! How was paradigm used in the reading?

Liz DeWolf said...

I came across a discussion of a "paradigm" in a book (Women of the Praia by Sally Cole) I am reading for anthropology of women and gender. The paradigm the author refers to is the concept of "honor and shame" applied to males and females in society. "Honor and shame...are components of a system of male prestige that served as a mechanism of social control, defined social boundaries and loyalties, substituted for physical violence, and provided some cohesiveness to otherwise fragmented societies" (Cole, 77) Basically, honor and shame is a concept by which men receive honor and prestige while women are shamed into controlling their sexuality in order to uphold men's honor. Cole calls this a paradigm because many anthropologists assume this pattern to be true of all cultures in some form and often have a difficult time accepting that this may not be universal. The aim of her book is to show that a particular rural group in Brazil does not follow this cultural code, or "paradigm." According to Kuhn, this sort of revelation might result in a paradigm shift of the way in which anthropologists view the relations between genders in any culture. I can't really tell if Cole and Kuhn are using the same definition of a paradigm, as Cole only mentions the word once in her book. Nonetheless, I found it interesting.