Sociogen reflux?

Bill Barowy (wbarowy who-is-at mail.lesley.edu)
Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:34:47 -0400

At 1:44 PM -0500 7/15/99, dkirsh who-is-at lsu.edu wrote:
>assumptions.) What one buys by taking the social as primary is the
>opportunity to theorize the social/cultural independently of the individual.
>But that's just what the pragmatists feared (how American!). Taking the
>two as balanced means that the theorizing of either is problematized.

The dearth of my social science training has led to puzzlement over the rules for theory selection that seem to be generally assumed by some others on this list. Permit me to be embarrassed by asking three interrelated questions to David's last statement:

1) How is the theorizing problematized?

2) What principle prevents a theory of social and individual combined?

3) Why must a theory take the individual or the social as primary, and what are the theoretical consequences for either to be "primary"?

Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley College, 31 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]