Citation

Michalski JH. Sociol. Q. 2008; 49(2): 253-274.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, Midwest Sociological Society, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1111/j.1533-8525.2008.00114.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Marshall's (2008) critique of Black's (1995, 2000a, 2000b) pure sociology paradigm reveals his preference for studying the psychological properties of individuals, rather than developing a genuinely sociological framework for studying “social life.” The current rejoinder concentrates on four main issues, starting with a discussion of the ontological status of social life as a reality sui generis. The second section deals with the scientific status of pure sociology and clarifies the underlying logic of the explanatory approach. The third part considers the scientific adequacy or validity of pure sociology. Where the intellectual stakes are highest—the theoretical validity of “pure sociology”—Marshall's critique falls flattest: the available evidence overwhelmingly supports the theoretical claims of pure sociologists. By the same token, Marshall fails to demonstrate the utility of psychologizing social life, or how the imputation of psychological variables enhances the explanatory power of purely sociological models. The paper then reveals the hypocrisy of particular aspects of Marshall's critique, as the evidence indicates that he has used some similar elements of theory construction for which he has criticized Black and the pure sociology framework. The conclusion reminds readers of the excitement of pure sociology's mission beyond the futility of irresolvable philosophical quibbles.