text stringlengths 9 3.55k | source stringlengths 31 280 |
|---|---|
Agon (Greek ἀγών) is a Greek term for a conflict, struggle or contest. This could be a contest in athletics, in chariot or horse racing, or in music or literature at a public festival in ancient Greece. Agon is the word-forming element in 'agony', explaining the concept of agon(y) in tragedy by its fundamental characters, the protagonist and antagonist. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
In one sense, agon meant a contest or a competition in athletics, for example, the Olympic Games (Ὀλυμπιακοὶ Ἀγῶνες). Agon was also a mythological personification of the contests listed above. This god was represented in a statue at Olympia with halteres (dumbbells) (ἁλτῆρες) in his hands. This statue was a work of Dionysius, and dedicated by Micythus of Rhegium. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
According to Pausanias, Agon was recognized in the Greek world as a deity, whose statue appeared at Olympia, presumably in connection with the Olympic Games, which operated as both religious festival in honor of Zeus and athletic competition. Agon is, perhaps, more of a spirit than a god in Greek mythology, but was understood to be related to both Zelos (rivalry) and Nike (victory). More generally, Agon referred to any competitive event that was held in connection with religious festivals, including athletics, music, or dramatic performances.Agon also appears as a concept in the New Testament and is defined in that context by Strong's Concordance as, agón: a gathering, contest, struggle; as an (athletic) contest; hence, a struggle (in the soul). | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
In Ancient Greek drama, particularly Old Comedy (fifth century B.C. ), agon refers to a contest or debate between two characters - the protagonist and the antagonist - in the highly structured Classical tragedies and dramas. The agon could also develop between an actor and the choir or between two actors with half of the chorus supporting each. Through the argument of opposing principles, the agon in these performances resembled the dialectic dialogues of Plato. The meaning of the term has escaped the circumscriptions of its classical origins to signify, more generally, the conflict on which a literary work turns. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
In 1948, Lincoln Kirstein posed the idea of a ballet that would later become known as Agon. After ten years of work before Agon's premiere, it became the final ballet in a series of collaborations between choreographer George Balanchine and composer Igor Stravinsky. Balanchine referred to this ballet as "the most perfect work" to come out of the collaboration between Stravinsky and himself. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
Harold Bloom in The Western Canon uses the term agon to refer to the attempt by a writer to resolve an intellectual conflict between his ideas and the ideas of an influential predecessor in which "the larger swallows the smaller", such as in chapter 18, Joyce's agon with Shakespeare. In "Man, Play, and Games" Roger Caillois uses the term Agon to define games of competitive nature. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
In sociopolitical theory, agon can refer to the idea that the clash of opposing forces necessarily results in growth and progress. The concept, known as agonism, has been proposed most explicitly by a number of scholars, including William E. Connolly, Bonnie Honig, and Claudio Colaguori, but is also implicitly present in the work of scholars such as Theodor Adorno, and Michel Foucault (see also agonistic democracy). | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
Words derived from agon include agony, agonism, antagonism, and protagonist. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agon |
San Mai (Japanese: 三枚, Hepburn: sanmai), in the context of metal blade construction/metalwork, refers to a knife, blade or sword that has the hard steel hagane forming the blade's edge, and the iron/stainless forming a jacket on both sides. It is also the term used to refer to the technique used to create these blades. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_mai |
"San mai" roughly translates as three flat things, in Japanese (San=three Mai=unit counter for flat objects). The term, and its root honsanmai, has been used to describe that construction method for many hundreds of years, from around 1300 A.D. It refers to when three layers of steel are used. The center is hard, and the side is typically softer. As san mai is a generic term for a technique, the term can't be trademarked. Outside the specific context of blade construction technique, the term, in general use in Japan, refers to three flat things (e.g. three tickets, or three pieces of paper), mai 枚, being the counter unit term for flat objects in Japanese. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_mai |
In stainless versions, this technique offers a practical and visible advantage of a superb cutting edge of modern Japanese knife steel, with a corrosion-resistant exterior. In professional Japanese kitchens, the edge is kept free of corrosion and knives are generally sharpened on a daily basis. Corrosion can be avoided by keeping the exposed portion of the non-stainless portion of the blade clean and dry after each use. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_mai |
Technically, it is a style of lamination used for blade construction, commonly used on blades that have a symmetrical grind (i.e. the edges are ground down from both sides to expose the edge, which is composed of the inner core material. In Japan, traditionally the steel used for the outer layer is Gukunan-tetsu The technique has been used outside Japan in modern knife making in the United States, often with new types of materials, including D-2 and carbon fibre. == References == | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_mai |
Antun Bauer (Vukovar, 18 August 1911 – Zagreb, 8 April 2000) was a Yugoslav museologist and collector.He was born in Vukovar. He received a degree in history and archeology in Zagreb in 1935, where he also obtained his PhD in 1937. He served as the director of Gipsoteka (nowadays Gliptoteka HAZU) in 1937–1952, as the director of the Croatian School Museum (until 1966) and as the director of the Museum Documentation Center in Zagreb (until 1975). In the period 1966-1989 he was the head and lecturer of the postgraduate course on museology.He collected art, art-historical literature, documents and materials, having contributed with his own collections to the establishment of numerous museums and gallery institutions in Croatia: Gipsoteka (1937), Archive of Fine Arts as part of the Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts, the Museum Documentation Center (1955), Art Gallery in Osijek (1941), and the Art Gallery within the Vukovar City Museum (1959). | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antun_Bauer_(museologist) |
The collection "Bauer" is regarded as one of the most comprehensive collections of Croatian art of the 19th and the 20th century. He organized a number of important exhibitions (Zlato i srebro Zadra, "The Gold and Silver of Zadar") and launched numerous museum publications, having contributed to and edited proceedings and journals Muzeologija ("Museology") and Vijesti muzealaca i konzervatora Hrvatske ("News for the Croatian museologists and conservators").He died in Zagreb. == References == | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antun_Bauer_(museologist) |
Chartjunk consists of all visual elements in charts and graphs that are not necessary to comprehend the information represented on the graph, or that distract the viewer from this information.Markings and visual elements can be called chartjunk if they are not part of the minimum set of visuals necessary to communicate the information understandably. Examples of unnecessary elements that might be called chartjunk include heavy or dark grid lines, unnecessary text, inappropriately complex or gimmicky font faces, ornamented chart axes, and display frames, pictures, backgrounds or icons within data graphs, ornamental shading and unnecessary dimensions. Another kind of chartjunk skews the depiction and makes it difficult to understand the real data being displayed. Examples of this type include items depicted out of scale to one another, noisy backgrounds making comparison between elements difficult in a chart or graph, and 3-D simulations in line and bar charts. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
The term chartjunk was coined by Edward Tufte in his 1983 book The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Tufte wrote: The interior decoration of graphics generates a lot of ink that does not tell the viewer anything new. The purpose of decoration varies—to make the graphic appear more scientific and precise, to enliven the display, to give the designer an opportunity to exercise artistic skills. Regardless of its cause, it is all non-data-ink or redundant data-ink, and it is often chartjunk. The term is relatively recent and is often associated with Tufte in other references.The concept is analogous to Adolf Loos's idea that ornament is a crime. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
The term chartjunk was first coined by Edward Tufte in 1983. The book was developed based on ideas and materials developed for a Princeton statistics course that Tufte co-taught with John Tukey. As a self-published book, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Tufte claims that good design is founded in minimalist design principles. Specifically, he states that "graphics reveal data" if they are designed with "graphical integrity." | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
Tufte, through minimalist design principles, was committed to an objective and neutral values of science. Other researchers have argued that minimalism is not objective and is full of its own rhetoric and potential to bias. Tufte, in coining the term chartjunk, also made direct comments about a well-known designer at that time, Nigel Holmes. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
Nearly all those who produce graphics for mass publication are trained exclusively in the fine arts and have had little experience with the analysis of data. Such experiences are essential for achieving precision and grace in the presence of statistics... Those who get ahead are those who beautified data, never mind statistical integrity. "Further, in his second published book, Envisioning Information, Tufte critiques Holmes' Diamonds chart:"Consider this unsavory exhibit at right – chockablock with cliché and stereotype, coarse humor, and a content-empty third dimension... Credibility vanishes in clouds of chartjunk; who would trust a chart that looks like a video game? "In a 1992 New York Times article, the reporter captures Holmes' response to Tufte's criticism:"Time's Nigel Holmes, creator of the diamonds graph, was understandably irked when Tufte criticized it. Holmes admits his work has sometimes been exaggerated, but feels that Tufte, in his insistence on absolute mathematical fidelity, remains trapped in ’the world of academia’ and insensitive to ’the world of commerce,’ with its need to grab an audience"This debate between Tufte and Holmes is emblematic of the tension between statistical and designerly approaches to visualization design. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
The term chartjunk is an umbrella term that can be used to describe a variety of visual devices and has been referenced by different terms across research. Stephen Few, a data visualization practitioner and consultant at Perceptual Edge, stated that Tufte's original definition of chartjunk was "too loose" and that "by defining chartjunk too broadly, Tufte to some degree invited the heated controversy that has raged ever since. "Robert Kosara, also a data visualization practitioner, researcher, and author of the blog EagerEyes, noted that not all chartjunk are the same, some are harmful (e.g. a busy background), others harmless (e.g. nice borders or pictures), and some even helpful (e.g. annotations).In a recent study by Parsons and Shukla, they interviewed data visualization designers and found that there is both a "corrective movement" in the design community to move away from minimalist design principles, but also, that designers had different definitions for what constitutes chartjunk. The authors felt that "better definitions are needed so that everyone has a shared understanding ." | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
The information visualization research community has researched the effects of chartjunk on how viewers interpret visualizations. There have been studies that found that chartjunk increases long-term memorability of the chart. A recent study found that chartjunk, in the form of semantically meaningful icons, increased accessibility of charts for people with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDD). | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chartjunk |
Hilling, earthing up or ridging is the technique in agriculture and horticulture of piling soil up around the base of a plant. It can be done by hand (usually using a hoe), or with powered machinery, typically a tractor attachment. Hilling buries the normally above-ground part of the plant, promoting desired growth. This may encourage the development of additional tubers (as with potatoes), force the plant to grow longer stems (leeks), or for some crops (chicory, leeks, asparagus etc.) this blanching technique keeps the stems or shoots pale and tender, or influences their taste. Hilling may also be used to stabilize the stems of crops which are easily disturbed by wind. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilling |
A common application of hilling is for potatoes. The tubers grow just below the surface, and can produce chlorophyll and solanine if exposed to light (green potatoes). Solanine is toxic in large doses, and can result in nausea, headache, and in rare cases, death. By hilling one or more times during the growing season – effectively, burying the potatoes in an additional few inches of soil – yield is improved, and the harvest remains edible. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilling |
In vineyards, at the beginning of the winter period: reduces the risk of damage by frost. Indeed, a heat gradient is formed by the thermal inertia of the earth. It is warmer inside the mound of soil. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilling |
facilitates the flow of water (which presence is important because of precipitation during winter). The evacuation can be done via grooves. destroys weeds. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilling |
Talcott Parsons (December 13, 1902 – May 8, 1979) was an American sociologist of the classical tradition, best known for his social action theory and structural functionalism. Parsons is considered one of the most influential figures in sociology in the 20th century. After earning a PhD in economics, he served on the faculty at Harvard University from 1927 to 1973. In 1930, he was among the first professors in its new sociology department. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Later, he was instrumental in the establishment of the Department of Social Relations at Harvard. Based on empirical data, Parsons' social action theory was the first broad, systematic, and generalizable theory of social systems developed in the United States and Europe. Some of Parsons' largest contributions to sociology in the English-speaking world were his translations of Max Weber's work and his analyses of works by Max Weber, Émile Durkheim, and Vilfredo Pareto. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Their work heavily influenced Parsons' view and was the foundation for his social action theory. Parsons viewed voluntaristic action through the lens of the cultural values and social structures that constrain choices and ultimately determine all social actions, as opposed to actions that are determined based on internal psychological processes.Although Parsons is generally considered a structural functionalist, towards the end of his career, in 1975, he published an article that stated that "functional" and "structural functionalist" were inappropriate ways to describe the character of his theory.From the 1970s on, a new generation of sociologists criticized Parsons' theories as socially conservative and his writings as unnecessarily complex. Sociology courses have placed less emphasis on his theories than at the peak of his popularity (from the 1940s to the 1970s). However, there has been a recent resurgence of interest in his ideas.Parsons was a strong advocate for the professionalization of sociology and its expansion in American academia. He was elected president of the American Sociological Association in 1949 and served as its secretary from 1960 to 1965. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
He was born on December 13, 1902, in Colorado Springs, Colorado. He was the son of Edward Smith Parsons (1863–1943) and Mary Augusta Ingersoll (1863–1949). His father had attended Yale Divinity School, was ordained as a Congregationalist minister, and served first as a minister for a pioneer community in Greeley, Colorado. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
At the time of Parsons' birth, his father was a professor in English and vice-president at Colorado College. During his Congregational ministry in Greeley, Edward had become sympathetic to the Social Gospel movement but tended to view it from a higher theological position and was hostile to the ideology of socialism. Also, both he and Talcott would be familiar with the theology of Jonathan Edwards. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The father would later become the president of Marietta College in Ohio. Parsons' family is one of the oldest families in American history. His ancestors were some of the first to arrive from England in the first half of the 17th century. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The family's heritage had two separate and independently developed Parsons lines, both to the early days of American history deeper into British history. On his father's side, the family could be traced back to the Parsons of York, Maine. On his mother's side, the Ingersoll line was connected with Edwards and from Edwards on would be a new, independent Parsons line because Edwards' eldest daughter, Sarah, married Elihu Parsons on June 11, 1750. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
As an undergraduate, Parsons studied biology and philosophy at Amherst College and received his BA in 1924. Amherst College had become the Parsons' family college by tradition; his father and his uncle Frank had attended it, as had his elder brother, Charles Edward. Initially, Parsons was attracted to a career in medicine, as he was inspired by his elder brother: 826 so he studied a great deal of biology and spent a summer working at the Oceanographic Institution at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Parsons' biology professors at Amherst were Otto C. Glaser and Henry Plough. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Gently mocked as "Little Talcott, the gilded cherub," Parsons became one of the student leaders at Amherst. Parsons also took courses with Walton Hale Hamilton and the philosopher Clarence Edwin Ayres, both known as "institutional economists". | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Hamilton, in particular, drew Parsons toward social science. : 826 They exposed him to literature by authors such as Thorstein Veblen, John Dewey, and William Graham Sumner. Parsons also took a course with George Brown in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and a course in modern German philosophy with Otto Manthey-Zorn, who was a great interpreter of Kant. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons showed from early on, a great interest in the topic of philosophy, which most likely was an echo of his father's great interest in theology in which tradition he had been profoundly socialized, a position unlike with his professors'. Two term papers that Parsons wrote as a student for Clarence E. Ayres's class in Philosophy III at Amherst have survived. They are referred to as the Amherst Papers and have been of strong interest to Parsons scholars. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The first was written on December 19, 1922, "The Theory of Human Behavior in its Individual and Social Aspects." The second was written on March 27, 1923, "A Behavioristic Conception of the Nature of Morals". The papers reveal Parsons' early interest in social evolution. The Amherst Papers also reveal that Parsons did not agree with his professors since he wrote in his Amherst papers that technological development and moral progress are two structurally-independent empirical processes. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
After Amherst, he studied at the London School of Economics for a year, where he was exposed to the work of Bronisław Malinowski, R. H. Tawney, L. T. Hobhouse, and Harold Laski. : 826 During his days at LSE, he made friends with E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Meyer Fortes, and Raymond Firth, who all participated in the Malinowski seminar. Also, he made a close personal friendship with Arthur and Eveline M. Burns. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
At LSE he met Helen Bancroft Walker, a young American, and they married on April 30, 1927. The couple had three children: Anne, Charles, and Susan and eventually four grandchildren. Walker's father was born in Canada but had moved to the Boston area and later become an American citizen. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In June, Parsons went on to the University of Heidelberg, where he received his PhD in sociology and economics in 1927. At Heidelberg, he worked with Alfred Weber, Max Weber's brother; Edgar Salin, his dissertation adviser; Emil Lederer; and Karl Mannheim. He was examined on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason by the philosopher Karl Jaspers. At Heidelberg, Parsons was also examined by Willy Andreas on the French Revolution. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons wrote his Dr. Phil. thesis on The Concept of Capitalism in the Recent German Literature, with his main focus on the work of Werner Sombart and Weber. It was clear from his discussion that he rejected Sombart's quasi-idealistic views and supported Weber's attempt to strike a balance between historicism, idealism and neo-Kantianism. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The most crucial encounter for Parsons at Heidelberg was with the work of Max Weber about whom he had never heard before. Weber became tremendously important for Parsons because his upbringing with a liberal but strongly-religious father had made the question of the role of culture and religion in the basic processes of world history a persistent puzzle in his mind. Weber was the first scholar who truly provided Parsons with a compelling theoretical "answer" to the question, so Parsons became totally absorbed in reading Weber. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons decided to translate Weber's work into English and approached Marianne Weber, Weber's widow. Parsons would eventually translate several of Weber's works into English. His time in Heidelberg had him invited by Marianne Weber to "sociological teas", which were study group meetings that she held in the library room of her and Max's old apartment. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
One scholar that Parsons met at Heidelberg who shared his enthusiasm for Weber was Alexander von Schelting. Parsons later wrote a review article on von Schelting's book on Weber. Generally, Parsons read extensively in religious literature, especially works focusing on the sociology of religion. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
One scholar who became especially important for Parsons was Ernst D. Troeltsch (1865–1923). Parsons also read widely on Calvinism. His reading included the work of Emile Doumerque, Eugéne Choisy, and Henri Hauser. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In 1927, after a year of teaching at Amherst (1926–1927), Parsons entered Harvard, as an instructor in the Economics Department, where he followed F. W. Taussig's lectures on economist Alfred Marshall and became friends with the economist historian Edwin Gay, the founder of Harvard Business School. Parsons also became a close associate of Joseph Schumpeter and followed his course General Economics. Parsons was at odds with some of the trends in Harvard's department which then went in a highly-technical and a mathematical direction. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
He looked for other options at Harvard and gave courses in "Social Ethics" and in the "Sociology of Religion". Although he entered Harvard through the Economics Department, his activities and his basic intellectual interest propelled him toward sociology. However, no Sociology Department existed during his first years at Harvard. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The chance for a shift to sociology came in 1930, when Harvard's Sociology Department was created under Russian scholar Pitirim Sorokin. Sorokin, who had fled the Russian Revolution from Russia in 1923, was given the opportunity to establish the department. Parsons became one of the new department's two instructors, along with Carl Joslyn. Parsons established close ties with biochemist and sociologist Lawrence Joseph Henderson, who took a personal interest in Parsons' career at Harvard. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons became part of L. J. Henderson's famous Pareto study group, in which some of the most important intellectuals at Harvard participated, including Crane Brinton, George C. Homans, and Charles P. Curtis. Parsons wrote an article on Pareto's theory and later explained that he had adopted the concept of "social system" from reading Pareto. Parsons also made strong connections with two other influential intellectuals with whom he corresponded for years: economist Frank H. Knight and Chester Barnard, one of the most dynamic businessmen of the US. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The relationship between Parsons and Sorokin turned sour. A pattern of personal tensions was aggravated by Sorokin's deep dislike for American civilization, which he regarded as a sensate culture that was in decline. Sorokin's writings became increasingly anti-scientistic in his later years, widening the gulf between his work and Parsons' and turning the increasingly positivistic American sociology community against him. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Sorokin also tended to belittle all sociology tendencies that differed from his own writings, and by 1934 was quite unpopular at Harvard. Some of Parsons' students in the department of sociology were people such as Robin Williams Jr., Robert K. Merton, Kingsley Davis, Wilbert Moore, Edward C. Devereux, Logan Wilson, Nicholas Demereth, John Riley Jr., and Mathilda White Riley. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Later cohorts of students included Harry Johnson, Bernard Barber, Marion Levy and Jesse R. Pitts. Parsons established, at the students' request, a little, informal study group which met year after year in Adams' house. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Toward the end of Parsons' career, German systems theorist Niklas Luhmann also attended his lectures. In 1932, Parsons bought a farmhouse near the small town of Acworth, but Parsons often, in his writing, referred to it as "the farmhouse in Alstead". The farmhouse was not big and impressive; indeed, it was a very humble structure with almost no modern utilities. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Still, it became central to Parsons' life, and many of his most important works were written in its peace and quiet. In the spring of 1933, Susan Kingsbury, a pioneer of women's rights in America, offered Parsons a position at Bryn Mawr College; however, Parsons declined the offer because, as he wrote to Kingsbury, "neither salary nor rank is really definitely above what I enjoy here".In the academic year of 1939–1940 Parsons and Schumpeter conducted an informal faculty seminar at Harvard, which discussed the concept of rationality. Among the participants were D. V. McGranahan, Abram Bergson, Wassily Leontief, Gottfried Haberler, and Paul Sweezy. Schumpeter contributed the essay "Rationality in Economics", and Parsons submitted the paper "The Role of Rationality in Social Action" for a general discussion. Schumpeter suggested that he and Parsons should write or edit a book together on rationality, but the project never materialized. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In the discussion between neoclassical economics and the institutionalists, which was one of the conflicts that prevailed within the field of economics in the 1920s and early 1930s, Parsons attempted to walk a very fine line. He was very critical about neoclassical theory, an attitude he maintained throughout his life and that is reflected in his critique of Milton Friedman and Gary Becker. He was opposed to the utilitarian bias within the neoclassical approach and could not embrace them fully. However, he agreed partly on their theoretical and methodological style of approach, which should be distinguished from its substance. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
He was thus unable to accept the institutionalist solution. In a 1975 interview, Parsons recalled a conversation with Schumpeter on the institutionalist methodological position: "An economist like Schumpeter, by contrast, would absolutely have none of that. I remember talking to him about the problem and .. I think Schumpeter was right. If economics had gone that way it would have had to become a primarily empirical discipline, largely descriptive, and without theoretical focus. That's the way the 'institutionalists' went, and of course Mitchell was affiliated with that movement." | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons returned to Germany in the summer of 1930 and became an eyewitness to the feverish atmosphere in Weimar Germany during which the Nazi Party rose to power. Parsons received constant reports about the rise of Nazism through his friend, Edward Y. Hartshorne, who was traveling there. Parsons began, in the late 1930s, to warn the American public about the Nazi threat, but he had little success, as a poll showed that 91 percent of the country opposed the Second World War.Most of the US thought also that the country should have stayed out of the First World War and that the Nazis were, regardless of what they did in Germany or even Europe, no threat to the US. Many Americans even sympathized with Germany, as many had ancestry from there, and the latter both was strongly anticommunist and had gotten itself out of the Great Depression while the US was still suffering from it. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
One of the first articles that Parsons wrote was "New Dark Age Seen If Nazis Should Win". He was one of the key initiators of the Harvard Defense Committee, aimed at rallying the American public against the Nazis. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons' voice sounded again and again over Boston's local radio stations, and he also spoke against Nazism during a dramatic meeting at Harvard, which was disturbed by antiwar activists. Together with graduate student Charles O. Porter, Parsons rallied graduate students at Harvard for the war effort. (Porter later became a Democratic US Representative for Oregon.) During the war, Parsons conducted a special study group at Harvard, which analyzed what its members considered the causes of Nazism, and leading experts on that topic participated. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In the spring of 1941, a discussion group on Japan began to meet at Harvard. The group's five core members were Parsons, John K. Fairbank, Edwin O. Reischauer, William M. McGovern, and Marion Levy Jr. A few others occasionally joined the group, including Ai-Li Sung and Edward Y. Hartshorne. The group arose out of a strong desire to understand the country whose power in the East had grown tremendously and had allied itself with Germany, but, as Levy frankly admitted, "Reischauer was the only one who knew anything about Japan." | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons, however, was eager to learn more about it and was "concerned with general implications." Shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Parsons wrote in a letter to Arthur Upham Pope (1881–1969) that the importance of studies of Japan certainly had intensified.In 1942, Parsons worked on arranging a major study of occupied countries with Bartholomew Landheer of the Netherlands Information Office in New York. Parsons had mobilized Georges Gurvitch, Conrad Arnsberg, Dr. Safranek and Theodore Abel to participate, but it never materialized for lack of funding. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In early 1942, Parsons unsuccessfully approached Hartshorne, who had joined the Psychology Division of the Office of the Coordinator of Information (COI) in Washington to interest his agency in the research project. In February 1943, Parsons became the deputy director of the Harvard School of Overseas Administration, which educated administrators to "run" the occupied territories in Germany and the Pacific Ocean. The task of finding relevant literature on both Europe and Asia was mindboggling and occupied a fair amount of Parsons' time. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
One scholar Parsons came to know was Karl August Wittfogel and they discussed Weber. On China, Parsons received fundamental information from Chinese scholar Ai-Li Sung Chin and her husband, Robert Chin. Another Chinese scholar Parsons worked closely with in this period was Hsiao-Tung Fei (or Fei Xiaotong) (1910–2005), who had studied at the London School of Economics and was an expert on the social structure of the Chinese village. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons met Alfred Schütz during the rationality seminar, which he conducted together with Schumpeter, at Harvard in the spring of 1940. Schutz had been close to Edmund Husserl and was deeply embedded in the latter's phenomenological philosophy. Schutz was born in Vienna but moved to the US in 1939, and for years, he worked on the project of developing a phenomenological sociology, primarily based on an attempt to find some point between Husserl's method and Weber's sociology. Parsons had asked Schutz to give a presentation at the rationality seminar, which he did on April 13, 1940, and Parsons and Schutz had lunch together afterward. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Schutz was fascinated with Parsons' theory, which he regarded as the state-of-the-art social theory, and wrote an evaluation of Parsons' theory that he kindly asked Parsons to comment. That led to a short but intensive correspondence, which generally revealed that the gap between Schutz's sociologized phenomenology and Parsons' concept of voluntaristic action was far too great. From Parsons' point of view, Schutz's position was too speculative and subjectivist, and tended to reduce social processes to the articulation of a Lebenswelt consciousness. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
For Parsons, the defining edge of human life was action as a catalyst for historical change, and it was essential for sociology, as a science, to pay strong attention to the subjective element of action, but it should never become completely absorbed in it since the purpose of a science was to explain causal relationships, by covering laws or by other types of explanatory devices. Schutz's basic argument was that sociology cannot ground itself and that epistemology was not a luxury but a necessity for the social scientist. Parsons agreed but stressed the pragmatic need to demarcate science and philosophy and insisted moreover that the grounding of a conceptual scheme for empirical theory construction cannot aim at absolute solutions but needs to take a sensible stock-taking of the epistemological balance at each point in time. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
However, the two men shared many basic assumptions about the nature of social theory, which has kept the debate simmering ever since. By request from Ilse Schutz, after her husband's death, Parsons gave, on July 23, 1971, permission to publish the correspondence between him and Schutz. Parsons also wrote "A 1974 Retrospective Perspective" to the correspondence, which characterized his position as a "Kantian point of view" and found that Schutz's strong dependence on Husserl's "phenomenological reduction" would make it very difficult to reach the kind of "conceptual scheme" that Parsons found essential for theory-building in social sciences.Between 1940 and 1944, Parsons and Eric Voegelin (1901–1985) exchanged intellectual views through correspondence. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons had probably met Voegelin in 1938 and 1939, when Voegelin held a temporary instructor appointment at Harvard. The bouncing point for their conversation was Parsons' manuscript on anti-Semitism and other materials that he had sent to Voegelin. Discussion touched on the nature of capitalism, the rise of the West, and the origin of Nazism. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The key to the discussion was the implication of Weber's interpretation of Protestant ethics and the impact of Calvinism on modern history. Although the two scholars agreed on many fundamental characteristics about Calvinism, their understanding of its historical impact was quite different. Generally, Voegelin regarded Calvinism as essentially a dangerous totalitarian ideology; Parsons argued that its current features were temporary and that the functional implications of its long-term, emerging value-l system had revolutionary and not only "negative" impact on the general rise of the institutions of modernity. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The two scholars also discussed Parsons' debate with Schütz and especially why Parsons had ended his encounter with Schutz. Parsons found that Schutz, rather than attempting to build social science theory, tended to get consumed in philosophical detours. Parsons wrote to Voegelin: "Possibly one of my troubles in my discussion with Schuetz lies in the fact that by cultural heritage I am a Calvinist. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
I do not want to be a philosopher – I shy away from the philosophical problems underlying my scientific work. By the same token I don't think he wants to be a scientist as I understand the term until he has settled all the underlying philosophical difficulties. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
If the physicists of the 17th century had been Schuetzes there might well have been no Newtonian system. "In 1942, Stuart C. Dodd published a major work, Dimensions of Society, which attempted to build a general theory of society on the foundation of a mathematical and quantitative systematization of social sciences. Dodd advanced a particular approach, known as an "S-theory". | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons discussed Dodd's theoretical outline in a review article the same year. Parsons acknowledged Dodd's contribution to be an exceedingly formidable work but argued against its premises as a general paradigm for the social sciences. Parsons generally argued that Dodd's "S-theory", which included the so-called "social distance" scheme of Bogardus, was unable to construct a sufficiently sensitive and systematized theoretical matrix, compared with the "traditional" approach, which has developed around the lines of Weber, Pareto, Émile Durkheim, Sigmund Freud, William Isaac Thomas, and other important agents of an action-system approach with a clearer dialogue with the cultural and motivational dimensions of human interaction. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In April 1944, Parsons participated in a conference, "On Germany after the War", of psychoanalytical oriented psychiatrists and a few social scientists to analyze the causes of Nazism and to discuss the principles for the coming occupation.During the conference, Parsons opposed what he found to be Lawrence S. Kubie's reductionism. Kubie was a psychoanalyst, who strongly argued that the German national character was completely "destructive" and that it would be necessary for a special agency of the United Nations to control the German educational system directly. Parsons and many others at the conference were strongly opposed to Kubie's idea. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons argued that it would fail and suggested that Kubie was viewing the question of Germans' reorientation "too exclusively in psychiatric terms". Parsons was also against the extremely harsh Morgenthau Plan, published in September 1944. After the conference, Parsons wrote an article, "The Problem of Controlled Institutional Change", against the plan.Parsons participated as a part-time adviser to the Foreign Economic Administration Agency between March and October 1945 to discuss postwar reparations and deindustrialization.Parsons was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1945. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons' situation at Harvard University changed significantly in early 1944, when he received a good offer from Northwestern University. Harvard reacted to the offer by appointing Parsons as the chairman of the department, promoting him to the rank of full professor and accepting the process of reorganization, which led to the establishment of the new department of Social Relations. Parsons' letter to Dean Paul Buck, on April 3, 1944, reveals the high point of this moment. Because of the new development at Harvard, Parsons chose to decline an offer from William Langer to join the Office of Strategic Services, the predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Langer proposed for Parsons to follow the American army in its march into Germany and to function as a political adviser to the administration of the occupied territories. Late in 1944, under the auspices of the Cambridge Community Council, Parsons directed a project together with Elizabeth Schlesinger. They investigated ethnic and racial tensions in the Boston area between students from Radcliffe College and Wellesley College. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
This study was a reaction to an upsurge of anti-Semitism in the Boston area, which began in late 1943 and continued into 1944. At the end of November 1946, the Social Research Council (SSRC) asked Parsons to write a comprehensive report of the topic of how the social sciences could contribute to the understanding of the modern world. The background was a controversy over whether the social sciences should be incorporated into the National Science Foundation. Parsons' report was in form of a large memorandum, "Social Science: A Basic National Resource", which became publicly available in July 1948 and remains a powerful historical statement about how he saw the role of modern social sciences. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons became a member of the Executive Committee of the new Russian Research Center at Harvard in 1948, which had Parsons' close friend and colleague, Clyde Kluckhohn, as its director. Parsons went to Allied-occupied Germany in the summer of 1948, was a contact person for the RRC, and was interested in the Russian refugees who were stranded in Germany. He happened to interview in Germany a few members of the Vlasov Army, a Russian Liberation Army that had collaborated with the Germans during the war. The movement was named after Andrey Vlasov, a Soviet general captured by the Germans in June 1942. The Vlasov movement's ideology was a hybrid of elements and has been called "communism without Stalin", but in the Prague Manifesto (1944), it had moved toward the framework of a constitutional liberal state.In Germany in the summer of 1948 Parsons wrote several letters to Kluckhohn to report on his investigations. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons' fight against communism was a natural extension of his fight against fascism in the 1930s and the 1940s. For Parsons, communism and fascism were two aspects of the same problem; his article "A Tentative Outline of American Values", published posthumously in 1989, called both collectivistic types "empirical finalism", which he believed was a secular "mirror" of religious types of "salvationalism". In contrast, Parsons highlighted that American values generally were based on the principle of "instrumental activism", which he believed was the outcome of Puritanism as a historical process. It represented what Parsons called "worldly asceticism" and represented the absolute opposite of empirical finalism. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
One can thus understand Parsons' statement late in life that the greatest threat to humanity is every type of "fundamentalism". By the term empirical finalism, he implied the type of claim assessed by cultural and ideological actors about the correct or "final" ends of particular patterns of value orientation in the actual historical world (such as the notion of "a truly just society"), which was absolutist and "indisputable" in its manner of declaration and in its function as a belief system. A typical example would be the Jacobins' behavior during the French Revolution. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons' rejection of communist and fascist totalitarianism was theoretically and intellectually an integral part of his theory of world history, and he tended to regard the European Reformation as the most crucial event in "modern" world history. Like Weber, he tended to highlight the crucial impact of Calvinist religiosity in the socio-political and socio-economic processes that followed. He maintained it reached its most radical form in England in the 17th century and in effect gave birth to the special cultural mode that has characterized the American value system and history ever since. The Calvinist faith system, authoritarian in the beginning, eventually released in its accidental long-term institutional effects a fundamental democratic revolution in the world. Parsons maintained that the revolution was steadily unfolding, as part of an interpenetration of Puritan values in the world at large. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons defended American exceptionalism and argued that, because of a variety of historical circumstances, the impact of the Reformation had reached a certain intensity in British history. Puritan, essentially Calvinist, value patterns had become institutionalized in Britain's internal situation. The outcome was that Puritan radicalism was reflected in the religious radicalism of the Puritan sects, in the poetry of John Milton, in the English Civil War, and in the process leading to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. It was the radical fling of the Puritan Revolution that provided settlers in early 17th-century Colonial America, and the Puritans who settled in America represented radical views on individuality, egalitarianism, skepticism toward state power, and the zeal of the religious calling. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The settlers established something unique in the world that was under the religious zeal of Calvinist values. Therefore, a new kind of nation was born, the character of which became clear by the time of the American Revolution and in the US constitution, and its dynamics were later studied by Alexis de Tocqueville. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The French Revolution was a failed attempt to copy the American model. Although America has changed in its social composition since 1787, Parsons maintained that it preserves the basic revolutionary Calvinist value pattern. That has been further revealed in the pluralist and highly individualized America, with its thick, network-oriented civil society, which is of crucial importance to its success and these factors have provided it with its historical lead in the process of industrialization. Parsons maintained that this has continued to place it in the leading position in the world, but as a historical process and not in "the nature of things". Parsons viewed the "highly special feature of the modern Western social world" as "dependent on the peculiar circumstances of its history, and not the necessary universal result of social development as a whole". | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In contrast to some "radicals", Parsons was a defender of modernity. He believed that modern civilization, with its technology and its constantly evolving institutions, was ultimately strong, vibrant, and essentially progressive. He acknowledged that the future had no inherent guarantees, but as sociologists Robert Holton and Bryan Turner said that Parsons was not nostalgic and that he did not believe in the past as a lost "golden age" but that he maintained that modernity generally had improved conditions, admittedly often in troublesome and painful ways but usually positively. He had faith in humanity's potential but not naïvely. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
When asked at the Brown Seminary in 1973 if he was optimistic about the future, he answered, "Oh, I think I'm basically optimistic about the human prospects in the long run." Parsons pointed out that he had been a student at Heidelberg at the height of the vogue of Oswald Spengler, author of The Decline of the West, "and he didn't give the West more than 50 years of continuing vitality after the time he wrote.... Well, its more than 50 years later now, and I don't think the West has just simply declined. He was wrong in thinking it was the end." | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
At Harvard, Parsons was instrumental in forming the Department of Social Relations, an interdisciplinary venture among sociology, anthropology, and psychology. The new department was officially created in January 1946 with him as the chairman and with prominent figures at the faculty, such as Stouffer, Kluckhohn, Henry Murray and Gordon Allport. An appointment for Hartshorne was considered but he was killed in Germany by an unknown gunman as he was driving on the highway. His position went instead to George C. Homans. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The new department was galvanized by Parsons' idea of creating a theoretical and institutional base for a unified social science. Parsons also became strongly interested in systems theory and cybernetics and began to adopt their basic ideas and concepts to the realm of social science, giving special attention to the work of Norbert Wiener (1894–1964). Some of the students who arrived at the Department of Social Relations in the years after the Second World War were David Aberle, Gardner Lindzey, Harold Garfinkel, David G. Hays, Benton Johnson, Marian Johnson, Kaspar Naegele, James Olds, Albert Cohen, Norman Birnbaum, Robin Murphy Williams, Jackson Toby, Robert N. Bellah, Joseph Kahl, Joseph Berger, Morris Zelditch, Renée Fox, Tom O'Dea, Ezra Vogel, Clifford Geertz, Joseph Elder, Theodore Mills, Mark Field, Edward Laumann, and Francis Sutton. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Renée Fox, who arrived at Harvard in 1949, would become a very close friend of the Parsons family. Joseph Berger, who also arrived at Harvard in 1949 after finishing his BA from Brooklyn College, would become Parsons' research assistant from 1952 to 1953 and would get involved in his research projects with Robert F. Bales. According to Parsons' own account, it was during his conversations with Elton Mayo (1880–1949) that he realized it was necessary for him to take a serious look at the work of Freud. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
In the fall of 1938, Parsons began to offer a series of non-credit evening courses on Freud. As time passed, Parsons developed a strong interest in psychoanalysis. He volunteered to participate in nontherapeutic training at the Boston Psychoanalytic Institute, where he began a didactic analysis with Grete Bibring in September 1946. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Insight into psychoanalysis is significantly reflected in his later work, especially reflected in The Social System and his general writing on psychological issues and on the theory of socialization. That influence was also to some extent apparent in his empirical analysis of fascism during the war. Wolfgang Köhler's study of the mentality of apes and Kurt Koffka's ideas of Gestalt psychology also received Parsons' attention. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
During the late 1940s and the early 1950s, he worked very hard on producing some major theoretical statements. In 1951, Parsons published two major theoretical works, The Social System and Toward a General Theory of Action. The latter work, which was coauthored with Edward Tolman, Edward Shils and several others, was the outcome of the so-called Carnegie Seminar at Harvard University, which had taken place in the period of September 1949 and January 1950. The former work was Parsons' first major attempt to present his basic outline of a general theory of society since The Structure of Social Action (1937). | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
He discusses the basic methodological and metatheoretical principles for such a theory. He attempts to present a general social system theory that is built systematically from most basic premises and so he featured the idea of an interaction situation based on need-dispositions and facilitated through the basic concepts of cognitive, cathectic, and evaluative orientation. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The work also became known for introducing his famous pattern variables, which in reality represented choices distributed along a Gemeinschaft vs. Gesellschaft axis. The details of Parsons' thought about the outline of the social system went through a rapid series of changes in the following years, but the basics remained. During the early 1950s, the idea of the AGIL model took place in Parsons's mind gradually. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
According to Parsons, its key idea was sparked during his work with Bales on motivational processes in small groups.Parsons carried the idea into the major work that he co-authored with a student, Neil Smelser, which was published in 1956 as Economy and Society. Within this work, the first rudimentary model of the AGIL scheme was presented. It reorganized the basic concepts of the pattern variables in a new way and presented the solution within a system-theoretical approach by using the idea of a cybernetic hierarchy as an organizing principle. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The real innovation in the model was the concept of the "latent function" or the pattern maintenance function, which became the crucial key to the whole cybernetic hierarchy. During its theoretical development, Parsons showed a persistent interest in symbolism. An important statement is Parsons' "The Theory of Symbolism in Relation to Action". | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
The article was stimulated by a series of informal discussion group meetings, which Parsons and several other colleagues in the spring of 1951 had conducted with philosopher and semiotician Charles W. Morris. His interest in symbolism went hand in hand with his interest in Freud's theory and "The Superego and the Theory of Social Systems", written in May 1951 for a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association. The paper can be regarded as the main statement of his own interpretation of Freud, but also as a statement of how Parsons tried to use Freud's pattern of symbolization to structure the theory of social system and eventually to codify the cybernetic hierarchy of the AGIL system within the parameter of a system of symbolic differentiation. His discussion of Freud also contains several layers of criticism that reveal that Parsons' use of Freud was selective rather than orthodox. In particular, he claimed that Freud had "introduced an unreal separation between the superego and the ego". | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons was an early subscriber to systems theory. He had early been fascinated by the writings of Walter B. Cannon and his concept of homeostasis as well as the writings of French physiologist Claude Bernard. His interest in systems theory had been further stimulated by his contract with L.J. Henderson. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Parsons called the concept of "system" for an indispensable master concept in the work of building theoretical paradigms for social sciences. From 1952 to 1957, Parsons participated in an ongoing Conference on System Theory under the chairmanship of Roy R. Grinker, Sr., in Chicago. Parsons came into contact with several prominent intellectuals of the time and was particularly impressed by the ideas of social insect biologist Alfred Emerson. | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talcott_Parsons |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.