TL;DR: A partir de l'exemple du theoreme de Thomas as discussed by the authors, l'A. I. Thomas aborde plusieurs problemes importants de la sociologie de la science, en particulier le phenomene de la citation partielle.
Abstract: A partir de l'exemple du theoreme de Thomas ( « si les hommes definissent des situations comme reelles, elles sont reelles dans leurs consequences » ), et de son utilisation dans les sciences sociales, l'A. aborde plusieurs problemes importants de la sociologie de la science, en particulier le « phenomene de la citation partielle » . Quelles normes et quels usages existent en matiere de citation ? Le fait que seul W. I. Thomas soit generalement cite, et non Dorothy Swaine Thomas, releve-t-il d'un comportement sexiste ? Peut-on egalement parler d'un « effet Matthew » (qui se traduit par un renforcement de la notoriete des universitaires les plus renommes) ? L'A. repond a ces questions en produisant notamment des documents d'une serie d'echanges epistolaires
TL;DR: This article extended the applicability of sociologies of knowledge (Thomas Theorem, social constructionism) and Gidden's structuration theory to inform a post-modern analysis of America's binary racial paradigm.
Abstract: The discipline of Sociology has generated great contributions to scholarship and research about American race relations. Much of the theorizing on American race relations in America is expressed in binary terms of black and white. Historically, the study of American race relations typically problematizes the “othered” status, that is, the non-white status in America’s racial hierarchy. However, the sociology of race relations has historically failed to take into account both sides of the black/white binary paradigm when addressing racial inequality. In other words, in the case of race, it becomes difficult to see the forest for the trees. Thus, in Sociology, we find less scholarship about the role “whiteness as the norm” plays in sustaining social privilege beyond that which is accorded marginalized others. In order to examine the historical black/white binary paradigm of race in America, it is important to understand its structuration. This article extends the applicability of sociologies of knowledge (Thomas Theorem, social constructionism) and Gidden’s structuration theory to inform a postmodern analysis of America’s binary racial paradigm.
TL;DR: Bunge as discussed by the authors argues that the two fields are so entangled with one another that no demarcation is possible or, indeed, desirable, and demonstrates that philosophical problematics arise in social science research.
Abstract: Most social scientists and philosophers claim that sociology and philosophy are disjoint fields of inquiry. Some have wondered how to trace the precise boundary between them. Mario Bunge argues that the two fields are so entangled with one another that no demarcation is possible or, indeed, desirable. In fact, sociological research has demonstrably philosophical pre-suppositions. In turn, some findings of sociology are bound to correct or enrich the philosophical theories that deal with the world, our knowledge of it, or the ways of acting upon it. While Bunge's thesis would hardly have shocked Mill, Marx, Durkheim, or Weber, it is alien to the current sociological mainstream and dominant philosophical schools. Bunge demonstrates that philosophical problematics arise in social science research. A fertile philosophy of social science unearths critical presuppositions, analyzes key concepts, refines effective research strategies, crafts coherent and realistic syntheses, and identifies important new problems. Bunge examines Marx's and Durkheim's thesis that social facts are as objective as physical facts; the so-called Thomas theorem that refutes the behaviorist thesis that social agents react to social stimuli rather than to the way we perceive them; and Merton's thesis on the ethos of basic science which shows that science and morality are intertwined. He considers selected philosophical problems raised by contemporary social studies and argues forcefully against tolerance of shabby work in academic social science and philosophy alike.
TL;DR: Condorcet as mentioned in this paper was a French mathematician and Philosopher of a liberal persuasion who was a member of the French National Assembly and was a sometime supporter of the Jacobin faction, but escaped.
Abstract: Condorcet. Jean-Antoine-Nicholas Caritat, Marquis de Condorcet was a French mathematician and Philosopher of a liberal persuasion. Condorcet held a seat in the French National Assembly and was a sometime supporter of the Jacobin faction. For speaking out against the Jacobin Leader Robespierre he was ordered to be arrested, but escaped. While in hiding, he wrote his book Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progress de l’esprit humain which figures prominently in the polemic of Mathus’s Essay. Condorcet was eventually caught and put in prison where it is said, he was ‘allowed’ to commit suicide. His book was published in 1794 after his death. An English translation published in 1795 was an immediate bestseller. References to Condorcet can be found in Sharma.