What Is The Difference Between Mills And Berger View Of Sociology

708 Words2 Pages

Journal #1
Prompt: Mills and Berger present somewhat different visions of what drives sociologists and what the purpose of sociology is or should be. In what significant ways do their visions differ? Which do you find more compelling and why?
Berger starts by describing how many people who study sociology are motivated by the desire to “work with people” or “help people” in workplaces such as public relations, human resources, community planning, and so on. However, this way of thinking is not ideal or suitable to the field of sociology itself. According to him, the true sociologist is a person highly interested and passionate about the subject matter itself – that is, the “doings of men.” This interest drives the sociologist to explore human …show more content…

Instead of personal interest, Mills focuses on how the drive for sociology stems from a necessity of trying to keep up with the current high-pace and constantly changing society. When simply knowing facts or having skills of reasoning is not enough, people should turn to rely on a “sociological imagination” to organize and make sense of what is happening in the world and themselves. In this sense, sociologists should not just be limited to people specifically interested in the particular field, but rather people in all types of fields related to the concept – “journalists and scholars, artists and publics, scientists and editors.” Following this train of thought, the study of sociology is highly practical. The sociological imagination – drawing from biology, history, and society – consistently asks questions on three main topics: the structure of society, society’s stance in human history, and the various types of humans in society. Sociology views issue in the society as the interaction of two opposing forces: which values are cherished, and which values are threatened. In the current time, the main purpose of sociology is to explore in particular the uneasiness (unawareness of cherished values but awareness of threat) and indifference (unawareness of both cherished values and threats to them) people feel. In this sense, again, sociology is highly practical due to its focus on current problems that can or should be …show more content…

My idea of sociology is that it is very practical since it is about humans and we deal with humans everyday – instead of simply pursuing it theoretically, why not put it into practice and actually help people? The opposing factors of cherished values and threats is also a very interesting idea I have never encountered before, and I agree with the lack of awareness of them being a crucial problem in our high-paced society. Berger’s view on sociology, to me, though much more organized with the specific guidelines, also poses more limitations. Although Berger does explain that his words describe the “ideal” sociologist (and thus he/she is not expected to be found in real-life), I still believe that striving for more connections with other fields will be more beneficial instead of narrowing and specifying the field of sociology itself. The various “images” of sociologists he mentions, while inaccurate according to him, can nevertheless be useful in my opinion. The result of my support for Mill’s argument mainly lies in my preference of usefulness or improvements in society (thus benefiting more people) over the pure pursue of

Open Document