Theoria

[Updated]

The manual for the doctoral programme in sociology at York University defines the meaning and intent of the comprehensive examinations as follows:

The comprehensives are intended to prepare the student for the dissertation, to do research and to teach in a field. Outside the structure of a course, the comprehensive provides the student with the challenge of examining and synthesizing a body of theory, and usually related empirical research. Comprehensiveness in a field combines breadth, depth and synthetic ability, without necessarily entailing exhaustive knowledge of the field. Students are expected to have a broad understanding of the major theoretical perspectives in the field and key debates. In most fields, comprehensiveness also requires a good knowledge of the alternative approaches relevant to empirical research, key findings and their interpretation in relation to theoretical approaches, and gaps in current research.

The tasks I have set out for myself in my second comprehensive examination is to take up the question of contemporary attempts to articulate a “critical social science” in light of “critical social theory”. By my reading, this entails a number of separate, yet related, activities:

• develop a coherent understanding of the meaning of ‘critical’, especially in relation to ‘theory’ (“What is critical theory?”)
• articulate the difference between a ‘traditional social science’ and ‘critical social science’ (“What is social science?”)
• define the object of ‘social science’ (“What is the social?”)
• explain why it matters if social science is ‘traditional’ or ‘critical’ (“Why does this matter?”)
• the relation of the investigator to their object (“What is being critical?”)

In my view, one of the best ways to do such an activity is to re-apprehend to so-called ‘classical’ and ‘formative’ texts of social science (i.e., sociology) in light of recent work in social theory and the philosophy of social science. Such a move enables one to compare the result of the ‘application’ of contemporary critical approaches to classical texts with what emerges from the account given in traditional social science.

A tentative reading list is appended below.

Althusser, Louis (1998) “From Capital to Marx’s Philosophy” and “The Object of Capital” in Reading Capital. London: Verso.

Althusser, Louis (1969) “Contradiction and Overdetermination” and “On the Materialist Dialectic” in For Marx. London: Penguin.

Arendt, Hannah (1998) The Human Condition, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bhaskar, Roy (1989) Reclaiming Reality. London: Verso.

Bourdieu, Pierre (2000) Pascalian Meditations. Stanford: Stanford UP.

Bourdieu, Pierre (2004) Science of Science and Reflexivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bourdieu, Pierre (2005) The Social Structures of the Economy. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari (1983) Anti-Oedipus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Durkheim, Emile (1997) The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: Free Press.

Durkheim, Emile (1982) The Rules of the Sociological Method. New York: Free Press.

Durkheim, Emile (1997) The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press.

Foucault, Michel (1994) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.

Foucault, Michel (2002) The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.

Habermas, Jurgen (1987) “The Uncoupling of System and Lifeworld” and “The Tasks of a Critical Theory of Society” in Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System. Boston: Beacon Press.

Habermas, Jurgen (1988) On the Logic of the Social Sciences. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Hacking, Ian (1975) The Emergence of Probability. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.

Hacking, Ian (1990) The Taming of Chance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.

Heidegger, Martin (1977) “Science and Reflection” in The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. New York: Harper and Row.

Horkheimer, Max and Theodor Adorno (2002) “The Concept of Enlightenment” in The Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum.

Horkheimer, Max (1998) “What is Critical Theory?” in Critical Theory. New York: Continuum.

Kant, Immanuel (1970) “On the Common Saying: ‘This May Be True In Theory, But It Does Not Apply In Practice” in Political Writings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.

Marx, Karl (1992) Capital, vol. 1. New York: Penguin.

Marx, Karl (1964) “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts” in Early Writings. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Marx, Karl (1973) Grundrisse. New York: Penguin.

Mills, C. Wright (2000) The Sociological Imagination. Oxford UP.

Parsons, Talcott (1964) “The Present Position and Prospects of Systematic Theory in Sociology” and “The Prospects of Social Theory” in Essays in Sociological Theory. New York: Free Press.

Simmel, Georg (1990) The Philosophy of Money. New York: Routledge.

Tonnies, Ferdinand (1988) Community and Society. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Weber, Max (1978) “Basic Sociological Concepts” in Economy & Society, vol. 1. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Weber, Max (1949) Methodology of the Social Sciences. New York: Free Press.

Weber, Max (2001) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Routledge.

Zizek, Slavoj (1989) The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso.

Zizek, Slavoj (2002) “Forward to the Second Edition” in For They Know Not What They Do, 2nd ed. London: Verso.