SOCIOLOGY OF LAW

Philip Selznick
{"title":"SOCIOLOGY OF LAW","authors":"Philip Selznick","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article Selznick developed the sociological imagination as a pointedly moral imagination, a vision of social science guided by moral philosophy, what Selznick himself called humanist science. This is a philosophy informed by the perpetual entwinement of human potential with human frailty. It makes the analyst sensitive to how ends are always interlinked with means, and how cherished ideals are inflected with an often-discouraging social reality. Only a morally subtle sociology can capture the moral ambivalence of human experience, the \"recalcitrance of people, practices, and institutions, the precariousness of the finest ideals, the complexity and delicacy of attempts at institutional transformation, the ease with which fine motives are refracted in unexpected directions\". Our means are sometimes tyrannical, our institutional goals, often displaced. And \"not only are our tools recalcitrant; so too are we ourselves\". Yet Selznick's scholarship consistently betrays a humble optimism: humble on the basis of hard, empirical realism about social institutions and their human environments, yet quietly optimistic because aware of the abiding potential, in humans and their institutional creations, for social progress. Selznick think, at the level of analysis, by rejecting such determinism; and at the level of political action, with methods of taming power with power, by dividing it into factions, say, or decentralizing it. The moral point: the virtue of an organization's membership by itself is never enough for realizing normatively good outcomes; the hands even of good people need to be bound by rules.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article Selznick developed the sociological imagination as a pointedly moral imagination, a vision of social science guided by moral philosophy, what Selznick himself called humanist science. This is a philosophy informed by the perpetual entwinement of human potential with human frailty. It makes the analyst sensitive to how ends are always interlinked with means, and how cherished ideals are inflected with an often-discouraging social reality. Only a morally subtle sociology can capture the moral ambivalence of human experience, the "recalcitrance of people, practices, and institutions, the precariousness of the finest ideals, the complexity and delicacy of attempts at institutional transformation, the ease with which fine motives are refracted in unexpected directions". Our means are sometimes tyrannical, our institutional goals, often displaced. And "not only are our tools recalcitrant; so too are we ourselves". Yet Selznick's scholarship consistently betrays a humble optimism: humble on the basis of hard, empirical realism about social institutions and their human environments, yet quietly optimistic because aware of the abiding potential, in humans and their institutional creations, for social progress. Selznick think, at the level of analysis, by rejecting such determinism; and at the level of political action, with methods of taming power with power, by dividing it into factions, say, or decentralizing it. The moral point: the virtue of an organization's membership by itself is never enough for realizing normatively good outcomes; the hands even of good people need to be bound by rules.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法律社会学
在这篇文章中,塞尔兹尼克将社会学想象发展为一种尖锐的道德想象,一种由道德哲学指导的社会科学视野,塞尔兹尼克自己称之为人文主义科学。这是一种由人类的潜力与人类的弱点永远纠缠在一起的哲学。它使分析者敏感地意识到目的总是与手段联系在一起,以及珍视的理想是如何被经常令人沮丧的社会现实所扭曲的。只有道德上微妙的社会学才能捕捉到人类经验的道德矛盾心理,“人们、实践和制度的抗拒,最优秀理想的不稳定性,制度转型尝试的复杂性和微妙性,良好动机在意想不到的方向上折射的容易程度”。我们的手段有时是暴虐的,我们的制度目标往往是错位的。而且“我们的工具不仅难以驾驭;我们自己也是如此。”然而,塞尔兹尼克的学术研究始终暴露出一种谦逊的乐观主义:谦逊的基础是对社会制度及其人类环境的严格的、经验主义的现实主义,然而,由于意识到人类及其制度创造对社会进步的持久潜力,他又安静地乐观起来。塞尔兹尼克认为,在分析的层面上,通过拒绝这种决定论;在政治行动层面,用权力驯服权力的方法,比如把权力分成派系,或者分散权力。道德观点:组织成员本身的美德永远不足以实现规范的良好结果;即使是好人的手也要受规则的约束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
MARBURY V. MADISON: THE ART OF JOHN MARSHALL GREGORY VII AND “DICTATUS PAPAE” LEGALITY OF THE URGENT SEARCH AND ADMISSIBILITY OF THE EVIDENCE SEIZED AS A RESULT OF THE SEARCH: ANALYSES OF THE DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF GEORGIA COMMENT TO THE ARTICLE 1261 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF GEORGIA HARTIAN CONCEPTION OF INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC LAW
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1