​現代社会学特論Ａ２
Selected Topics in Sociology A
 
秋学期／Fall 2019年度
Course Coordinator and Instructor: Dr Eric L. Hsu
E-mail: eric.hsu@unisa.edu.au

Kwansei Gakuin University, ​School of Sociology
​

Course Purpose / 授業目的
The purpose of this course is for students to gain an introductory English-based understanding of classical and contemporary sociological theory.
 
Learning Aims / 到達目標
Upon completion of the course, students will have:

• developed the ability to summarize and critically evaluate sociological arguments in English;
• obtained a basic understanding of classical and contemporary social theory; &
• learned how to reference sociological claims and texts appropriately, using an internationally recognized referencing style.

 
Course Outline / 授業の概要 
This course, delivered entirely in English, is designed to introduce students to the field of sociology. The principal aim of the course is to provide students with a broad overview of sociological theories, from which they can build upon in more advanced courses. The course has a specific focus on the various ways sociology involves theory development and critical analysis. The course covers classical sociological perspectives as well as key theoretical debates within contemporary sociology. Students will learn: 

• What the field of sociology consists of;

• How to construct and evaluate a well-founded sociological argument in written form.
• How the topics of modernity and capitalism have been theorized within classical and contemporary sociology; &
• The manifold ways in which sociological knowledge has been contested, transformed, and expanded.

 
Course Format / 授業方法 
The course predominantly consists of lectures and student discussions. At some sessions, students will be asked to complete non-assessed group work to aid in their learning.
 
Course Materials and Website 
There is no textbook for this course. All course materials will either be distributed to you in person in each of the classes or it will be posted online for you to access. A course website has been set up. This online resource contains links to the required readings and it also has other documents, such as reading notes, which will help you better understand the content that is being covered. If you have any difficulties accessing this website, please contact the course instructor (eric.hsu@unisa.edu.au). You may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader (https://get.adobe.com/reader/) to view the all of the uploaded documents. The course website also lists information about the course assignments and it contains links to the marking sheets. 

• https://www.ericlhsu.com/kgu-sociology-2019.html

 
Course Expectations
Class attendance is highly encouraged. The lectures and group work activities are there to help you better understand the course material. If you are unable to attend any of the classes, please e-mail the course instructor (eric.hsu@unisa.edu.au) to obtain the materials that may have been distributed. Please also do not hesitate to contact the course instructor if you experience any difficulties related to the course. Allowances can be made, in certain circumstances,
 
Assessment Summary:
 
1.  Annotated Bibliography (800 words) -- 40% -- Due: 5 November 2019
2.  Major Essay (1,200 words) -- 60% -- Due: 7 January 2020
 
Submitting Assignments
Assignments should be submitted via e-mail to the course instructor, Dr Eric L. Hsu (eric.hsu@unisa.edu.au). Or they can be physically submitted to the instructor on the due date.

Extensions
Extensions will be given for substantiated reasons if requested in writing before the deadline. Where applicable, documents will be required (e.g., doctor’s certificate) to substantiate your case. Longer extensions can be applied for in exceptional circumstances or in accordance with University Policy.

Academic Misconduct
All students are expected to comply with academic conventions regarding referencing, plagiarism and appropriate conduct.  
 
Referencing
In order to avoid plagiarism, it is expected that you reference as to acknowledge the use of the texts or concepts made by others.  All students are expected to properly cite references in their writing and also to provide a bibliography (or reference list) at the end of the assignment, where appropriate. The University of South Australia has produced resources on referencing which you may find helpful:

• https://lo.unisa.edu.au/mod/resource/view.php?id=930824

Annotated Bibliography
 
Weighting: 40%
Due Date: 5 November 2019
Length (in total): 800 words
 
The first course assignment tests your ability to produce an annotated bibliography. An annotated bibliography is an alphabetized list of citations of sources, which commonly deal with a particular theme or issue. What is distinctive about an annotated bibliography is that after each listed citation, there is an annotation, which is a brief description of the cited source. The purpose of the annotation is to inform the reader of the relevance and quality of the source that has been cited.
 
For the assignment, you are expected to find, cite, and annotate a total of four scholarly sources which directly engage with and cite a concept we covered in week #3, George Ritzer’s theory of ‘McDonaldization’.
 
Of the four scholarly sources you include in your annotated bibliography, you need to cite and annotate at least two scholarly journal articles and one scholarly book chapter in an edited volume.
 
The citations you include in your annotated bibliography should all be appropriate academic sources. Journal articles should be peer-reviewed, and books and book chapters should be produced and published by reputable outlets. Wikipedia, news articles, book reviews, and other non-scholarly sources should not be cited. The annotations should explain how each cited source relates to Ritzer’s theory of McDonaldization. Annotations should primarily be in your own words. For journal articles, particularly avoid quoting any text from the abstract. The word target for each annotation is 200 words. You will not be penalized at all if your annotations are 10% above or below this word limit.
 
Citations should strictly follow the Harvard referencing style guide: 

• https://lo.unisa.edu.au/mod/resource/view.php?id=930824

 
A book of scholarly texts that engage with Ritzer’s theory of McDonaldization, which you can draw from for this assignment, can be accessed here [pdf].

The marking sheet that will be used to grade your assignment can be accessed here [pdf].
 
Major Essay
 
Weighting: 60%
Due Date: 7 January 2020
Length: 1,200 words
 
The second piece of assessment for this course, worth 60% of your overall mark, is a major essay, which tests your ability to think critically about the social theories and themes covered throughout this course. The topic of your major essay should directly respond to one of the three essay questions listed below. It is important to note that, for this essay, you are expected not only to describe an issue within sociology that pertains to the essay prompt you have selected. You are also expected to critically analyze the various ways that the issue at hand has been theorized and studied.
 
To satisfy the requirements of the assignment, you are expected to: 

• Put forward an argument that responds appropriately to the essay prompt that you have selected;
• Write an introduction that sets out what you will argue in a clear and concise fashion;
• Structure your essay in a logical and coherent manner, using subheadings as needed;
• Produce a conclusion that makes a final statement in answer to the assigned question;
• Give a title to your essay that does not simply repeat the text of the essay prompt;
• Engage with and reference at least four academic sources, which directly pertain to the subject matter you are writing on. Two of these texts must come from the required readings list. (Note: Wikipedia, non-scholarly online sources, or textbooks should not be used for this assignment);
• Identifying the strengths and/or weaknesses of the theories, studies, and/or approaches that you are engaging with;
• Stay within the 1,200 word limit;
• Number all pages of your essay;major_essay_grading_sheet_v01_08_october_2019.pdf
• Follow the Harvard referencing style guide in your in-text citations and in the reference list you include at the end of your essay
  • https://lo.unisa.edu.au/mod/resource/view.php?id=930824

 
Major essay prompts: 

1. How are social relations visibly and invisibly constituted in contemporary social life?
2. What, if anything, is distinct about capitalism in the contemporary era?
3. Scientific knowledge in the modern world is completely objective and value-free. Drawing on key strands of sociological thought covered in this course, explain whether or not you think this claim is problematic.

The marking sheet that will be used to grade your assignment can be accessed here [pdf].

WEEK 1 – THE SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION – 24 SEPTEMBER 2019
 
Required Readings:

• Erdsman, M. P. (1997). How to Read Sociological Texts. In Gubbay, J., Middleton, C. and Ballard, C. (Eds.), The Student’s Companion to Sociology (pp. 254-260), Oxford: Blackwell.
• Mills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. London and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 3-11.
• Bauman, Z. (1992) Thinking Sociologically. In Giddens, A. (Ed.), Human Societies: An Introductory Reader in Sociology (pp. 7-12), Cambridge: Polity Press.

 
Other Materials

• Week #1 Reading Notes

 
WEEK 2 – CAPITALISM AND CLASS CONFLICT – 1 OCTOBER 2019           
 
Required Readings:

• Swales, J. & Feak, C. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students, 2nd edition, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 147-173.
• Marx, K. & Engels, F (1977). Communist Manifesto. In McLellan, D. (Ed.), Karl Marx: Selected Writings (pp. 221-246), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Further Readings:

• Lemert, C. C. (2015). Thinking the unthinkable: The riddles of classical social theories. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 47-60.  
• Elster, J. (1986). An Introduction to Karl Marx. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.  
• Burawoy, M., & Wright, E. (2002). Sociological marxism. In Turner, J. (Ed.), Handbook of sociological theory (pp. 459-486), New York: Klewer Academic.  
• Antonio, R., Ed. (2003). Marx and Modernity: Key Readings and Commentary. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.  
• Lamb, P. (2015). Marx and Engels' 'Communist Manifesto': A Reader's Guide. London: Bloomsbury Publishing,  

 
Other Materials

• Week #2 Reading Notes

WEEK 3 – MODERNITY AND BUREAUCRATIC DOMINATION – 8 OCTOBER 2019           

Required Readings:

• Weber, M. (2000). Bureaucracy. In Stillman, R. (Ed.), Public Administration: Concepts and Cases, Seventh edition (pp. 54-63), Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Ritzer, G. (1998). The Weberian Theory of Rationalization and the McDonaldization of Contemporary Society. In Kivisto, P. (Ed.), Illuminating Social Life: Classical and Contemporary Theory Revisited (pp. 37-61), Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.
• UniSA Learning Advisers and Librarians (2018) Harvard Referencing Guide UniSA. Retrieved from https://lo.unisa.edu.au/mod/resource/view.php?id=930824.

 
Further Readings:

• Weber, M. (1977). From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Bauman, Z. (1989). Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Adler, P. S. (2012). Perspective—the sociological ambivalence of bureaucracy: from Weber via Gouldner to Marx. Organization Science, 23(1), 244-266. 
• Rubenstein, R. (1975). The Cunning of History. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 22-35.  
• du Gay, P. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy: Weber, organization, ethics. London: Sage Publications.

Other Materials

• Week #3 Reading Notes

WEEK 4 – SUICIDE AS A SOCIAL FACT – 15 OCTOBER 2019
 
Required Readings:

• Durkheim, E. (2016). The Rules of Sociological Method. In Appelrouth, S. & Edles, L.D. (Eds.), Classical and Contemporary Sociological Theory: Text and Readings, 3rd edition (pp. 101-107), London: Sage Publications.
• Durkheim, E. (2005). Suicide. In Thompson, K. (Ed.) Readings from Emile Durkheim (pp. 63-83), London: Routledge.
• Turabian, K., et al. (2010). Student’s Guide to Writing College Papers, 4th edition, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, pp. 44-55.

Further Readings:

• Pescosolido, B. A., & Georgianna, S. (1989). Durkheim, suicide, and religion: Toward a network theory of suicide. American Sociological Review, 33-48.  
• Pedahzur, A., Perliger, A., & Weinberg, L. (2003). Altruism and fatalism: The characteristics of Palestinian suicide terrorists. Deviant Behavior, 24(4), 405-423.  
• Zevallos, Z. (2006). What Would Durkheim Say? Altruistic Suicide in Analyses of Suicide Terrorism. In Colic-Peisker, V. and Tilbury, F. (Eds.) Sociology for a Mobile World: Proceedings of The Annual Conference of The Australian Sociological Association 4-7 December (pp 1-11). Perth: University of Western Australia.  
• Van Poppel, F., & Day, L. H. (1996). A Test of Durkheim's Theory of Suicide--Without Committing the" Ecological Fallacy". American Sociological Review, 61(3), 500-507.  

Other Materials

• Week #4 Reading Notes

WEEK 5 – NO CLASS DUE TO ENTHRONEMENT DAY – 22 OCTOBER 2019
 
WEEK 6 – THE POSTMODERN CONDITION – 29 OCTOBER 2019

Required Readings:

• Lyotard, J. (1999). ‘The Postmodern Condition’ In Seidman, S. (ed.), The Postmodern Turn, Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, pp. 27-38.
• Anderson, W. T. (1997). The Future of the Self. New York: Penguin Putnam, pp. 33-49.
• Redman, P. (2006). Good essay writing: a social sciences guide. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, pp. 17-24.

 
Further Readings:

• Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity. Cambridge: Blackwell.  
• Sawai, A. (2013). Postmodernity. In Elliott, A., Katagiri, M. & Sawai, A. (Eds.), Routledge Companion To Contemporary Japanese Social Theory (pp. 200-220), London: Routledge.
• Han, S. (2010). Postmodern Social Theory. In Elliott, A. (Ed.), The Routledge Companion to Social Theory (pp. 117-134), New York: Routledge.  
• Lemert, C (2005). Postmodernism is not what you think, 2nd edition. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

 
Other Materials

• Week #6 Reading Notes

WEEK 7 – REAPPRAISING THE ENDS OF MODERNITY – 5 NOVEMBER 2019 
 
Required Readings:

• Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 36-53.  
• Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 49-64.
• Turabian, K., et al. (2010). Student’s Guide to Writing College Papers, 4th edition, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, pp. 63-74.

 
Further Readings:

• Mirchandani, R. (2005). Postmodernism and sociology: From the epistemological to the empirical. Sociological Theory, 23(1), 86-115.  
• Ryan, J. M. (2007). Postmodern social theory. In Ritzer, G. (Ed.), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology (pp. 3569-3572), Oxford, Blackwell.  
• Matthewman, S. and Hoey, D. (2006). What Happened to Postmodernism?. Sociology. 40(3): 529-547.

Other Materials

• Week #7 Reading Notes

WEEK 8 – ALTERNATIVE EPISTEMOLOGIES – 12 NOVEMBER 2019 

Required Readings:

• Smith, D. (2012). The conceptual practices of power. In Calhoun, C. et al., (Eds.), Contemporary Sociological Theory, 3rd edition (pp. 398-406), Oxford: Blackwell.
• Seth, S. (2014). The politics of knowledge: Or, how to stop being eurocentric. History Compass, 12(4), 311-320.

 
Further Readings:

• Collins, P. H. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of Black feminist thought. Social problems, 33(6), s14-s32.  
• Hekman, S. (1997). Truth and method: Feminist standpoint theory revisited. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 22(2), 341-365.  
• Harding, S. (1992). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is" strong objectivity?". The Centennial Review, 36(3), 437-470.  
• Stoetzler, M., & Yuval-Davis, N. (2002). Standpoint theory, situated knowledge and the situated imagination. Feminist theory, 3(3), 315-333.  
• Seth, S. (2013). "Once was blind but now can see": Modernity and the social sciences. International Political Sociology, 7(2), 136-151.  
• Hetherington, K. (2004). Secondhandedness: consumption, disposal, and absent presence. Environment and planning D: society and space, 22(1), 157-173.

Other Materials

• Week #8 Reading Notes

WEEK 9 – POWER/KNOWLEDGE – 19 NOVEMBER 2019 

Required Readings:

• Foucault, M. (1999). Power as knowledge. In Lemert, C. (ed.), Social Theory, 2nd edition (pp. 475-481), Boulder: Westview Press.
• Foucault, M. (2007). Discipline and punish. In Calhoun, C. et al., (Eds.), Contemporary Sociological Theory, 2nd edition (pp. 209-216), Oxford: Blackwell.
• Redman, P. (2006). Good essay writing: a social sciences guide. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, pp. 91-96.

Further Readings:

• Rouse, J. (1994). Power/knowledge. In Gutting, G. (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Foucault (pp. 95-122), New York: Cambridge University Press.  
• Power, M. (2011). Foucault and sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 35-56.  
• Wood, D. (2002). Foucault and Panopticism Revisited. Surveillance & Society, 1(3), 234-239.  
• O'Neill, J. (1986). The disciplinary society: from Weber to Foucault. British Journal of Sociology, 37(1), 42-60.

Other Materials

• Week #9 Reading Notes

WEEK 10 – SOCIOLOGY OF THE BODY – 26 NOVEMBER 2019 
 
Required Readings:

• Shilling, C. (2012). The Body and Social Theory, 3rd edition, London: Sage Publication, pp. 21-44.
• Young, I.M. (2010). Throwing like a girl. In Giddens, A. & Sutton, P. (Eds.), Sociology: Introductory Readings (pp. 206-210), Cambridge: Polity Press.

Further Readings:

• Turner, B. S. (2008). The body and society: Explorations in social theory. London: Sage Publications.  
• Bendelow, G. A., & Williams, S. J. (2002). The lived body: Sociological themes, embodied issues. London and New York: Routledge.  
• Crossley, N. (1995). Merleau-Ponty, the elusive body and carnal sociology. Body & society, 1(1), 43-63.  
• Crossley, N. (1995). Body techniques, agency and intercorporeality: On Goffman's relations in public. Sociology, 29(1), 133-149.

Other Materials

• Week #10 Reading Notes

WEEK 11 – CULTURE OF NEW CAPITALISM – 3 DECEMBER 2019 

Required Readings:

• Sennett, R. (1997). The new capitalism. Social Research, 64(2), 161-180.
• Ritzer, G., & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of consumer culture, 10(1), 13-36.
• Greasley, P. (2011). Doing Essays and Assignments: Essential Tips for Students. London: Sage Publications pp. 82-92.

 
Further Readings:

• Rifkin, J. (2001). The age of access: The new culture of hypercapitalism. New York: JP Tarcher.  
• Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 18(3-4), 161-188.  
• Sennett, R. (1998). The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York and London: WW Norton & Company.  
• Ritzer, G. (2015). Automating prosumption: The decline of the prosumer and the rise of the prosuming machines. Journal of Consumer Culture, 15(3), 407-424.  
• Ritzer, G. (2014). Prosumption: Evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the same?. Journal of Consumer Culture, 14(1), 3-24.  

Other Materials

• Week #11 Reading Notes

WEEK 12 – THE RISE OF PHILANTHROCAPITALISM – 10 DECEMBER 2019 
 
Note: There will be no class for this week. A video for this week’s lecture will be posted online for you to watch, which you can access through the course website.
 
Required Readings:

• Bishop, M., & Green, M. (2015). Philanthrocapitalism rising. Society, 52(6), 541-548.
• McGoey, L. (2012). Philanthrocapitalism and its critics. Poetics, 40(2), 185-199.

 
Further Readings:

• Rifkin, J. (2001). The age of access: The new culture of hypercapitalism. New York: JP Tarcher.  
• Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 18(3-4), 161-188.  
• Sennett, R. (1998). The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York and London: WW Norton & Company.  
• Ritzer, G. (2015). Automating prosumption: The decline of the prosumer and the rise of the prosuming machines. Journal of Consumer Culture, 15(3), 407-424.  
• Ritzer, G. (2014). Prosumption: Evolution, revolution, or eternal return of the same?. Journal of Consumer Culture, 14(1), 3-24.

Other Materials

• Week #12 Reading Notes

WEEK 13 – POWER IN THE ALGORITHM – 17 DECEMBER 2019 

Required Readings:

• Beer, D. (2009). Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious. New Media & Society, 11(6), 985-1002.
• Redman, P., & Maples, W. (2011). Good essay writing: A social sciences guide, 4th edition. London: Sage Publications, pp. 134-147.

 
Further Readings:

• Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New media & society, 14(7), 1164-1180.  
• Kraemer, F., Van Overveld, K., & Peterson, M. (2011). Is there an ethics of algorithms?. Ethics and Information Technology, 13(3), 251-260.  
• Han, S. (2010). Theorizing new media: Reflexivity, knowledge, and the Web 2.0. Sociological Inquiry, 80(2), 200-213.  
• Goldberg, G. (2011). Rethinking the public/virtual sphere: The problem with participation. New Media & Society, 13(5), 739-754.  

Other Materials

• Week #13 Reading Notes

WEEK 14A – NEW DIRECTIONS IN SOCIOLOGY – 7 JANUARY 2020 
 
Required Readings:

• Urry, J. (2005). Beyond the science of ‘society’. Sociological research online, 10(2), 1-3.

Other Materials

• Week #14A Reading Notes

WEEK 14B – SOCIOLOGICAL FRONTIERS – 10 JANUARY 2020 (MAKE-UP CLASS FOR 22 OCTOBER 2019)
 
Required Readings:

• Sternheimer, K. (2019, January 28). What Makes a Research Question Sociological? Retrieved October 4, 2019, from https://www.everydaysociologyblog.com/2019/01/what-makes-a-research-question-sociological.html.