Soc 100 syl, sp 00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Catalog Descrip |Dept Home |Schneider Homepage

1

Sociology 100: 801
Doing Morality:
Social Theories of Troubles and Problems
Spring 2000 Th 6:00-8:50 p.m. 309 HOW
Joseph Schneider, Office 130 Howard Hall, x2158
Hours:TTh 11:00 a.m.-12:00 Noon, T 1:30-3:00 p.m.
and by appt. Email:joseph.schneider@drake.edu ******************************************************************************

Course Themes, Focus

The idea behind this course is that it is viable to organize a set of readings, conversations, and student work around the proposition that the topic "morality" can be approached as something that is socially constructedrather than something simply "given" in culture and in social life. It aims to treat the moral or moral phenomena (whatever those are) in society both as "done" in and through social interaction, on the one hand, and also as cultural and social resources important in and to this very doing, on the other. As such, the course bears some relationship to at least two other courses commonly offered in sociology curricula:(1) social problems and (2) deviance. Indeed, it could be argued that all three courses and no doubt others (such as, perhaps, criminology and juvenile delinquency) could fall under an umbrella category that might be named "the creation, development, and change of the moral (moral phenomena) in social life."
Actually, the subtitle of the course as given above, "social theories of troubles and problems," directs us only toward what might be called the "negative" side of morality. What about "the good," as well as "the bad" and "the ugly"? The point is a good one. In principle, we should give as much attention to the "positive" as we do to the "negative."While there has been considerably more writing both inside and outside sociology on "the bad" than on "the good," given the ways that these two notions always are connected, we will not ignore "the good" even though we will concentrate more on "troubles and problems" later in the course.
This strange title, "Doing Morality:Social Theories of Troubles and Problems," is intended to sound certain themes of the course:

(1) "Doing morality":The word morality, whatever it means, is usually not placed after the action verb "to do."More often, morality seems to be thought of as an object or a quality of an object; something we "have" or something characteristic of an object or person. The idea of doingmorality is my way of trying to get at the "constructed" nature of morality, as something done, both in daily, "private" life and in "public" acts that often are portrayed in and/or constituted by the mass media. So, one theme or focus of the course is what it might mean to put these two words together in this way:"doing morality, and what some of the implications of this way of thinking might be both for the way we live our lives and pursue social change.
"Social theories":The point to make here is that I haven't written "sociological theories."I'm trying to suggest that there are diverse ways of thinking about morality, troubles, problems (as well as "the good"). Some of these are indeed "sociological,"meaning they are proposed and named by professional "Sociologists" as "Sociology."You know there are several social sciences. You also know there are many other ways of thinking about this topic of morality that come from literary studies, the arts, humanities, and the natural sciences among others. "Morality" is a topic everyone feels they can (or should?) speak about. You could make a long list of adjectives to take the place of "social" here (like "literary," "marxist," "Christian," "psychological," and so on). We will not feel restricted by exclusively "Sociological" ways of speaking about morality (the capital "S" is meant to mark professional sociology and professional sociologists, which usually speak self-consciously in the name of "Sociology-the-academic discipline").

(2)


			1
Sociology 100: 801 Doing Morality: Social Theories of Troubles and Problems Spring 2000 Th 6:00-8:50 p.m. 309 HOW Joseph Schneider, Office 130 Howard Hall, x2158 Hours:TTh 11:00 a.m.-12:00 Noon, T 1:30-3:00 p.m. and by appt. Email:joseph.schneider@drake.edu **************************************************************************** Course Themes, Focus** The idea behind this course is that it is viable to organize a set of readings, conversations, and student work around the proposition that the topic "morality" can be approached as something that is socially constructedrather than something simply "given" in culture and in social life. It aims to treat the moral or moral phenomena (whatever those are) in society both as "done" in and through social interaction, on the one hand, and also as cultural and social resources important in and to this very doing, on the other. As such, the course bears some relationship to at least two other courses commonly offered in sociology curricula:(1) social problems and (2) deviance. Indeed, it could be argued that all three courses and no doubt others (such as, perhaps, criminology and juvenile delinquency) could fall under an umbrella category that might be named "the creation, development, and change of the moral (moral phenomena) in social life." Actually, the subtitle of the course as given above, "social theories of troubles and problems," directs us only toward what might be called the "negative" side of morality. What about "the good," as well as "the bad" and "the ugly"? The point is a good one. In principle, we should give as much attention to the "positive" as we do to the "negative."While there has been considerably more writing both inside and outside sociology on "the bad" than on "the good," given the ways that these two notions always are connected, we will not ignore "the good" even though we will concentrate more on "troubles and problems" later in the course. This strange title, "Doing Morality:Social Theories of Troubles and Problems," is intended to sound certain themes of the course:			1
	(1)	"Doing morality":The word morality, whatever it means, is usually not placed after the action verb "to do."More often, morality seems to be thought of as an object or a quality of an object; something we "have" or something characteristic of an object or person. The idea of doingmorality is my way of trying to get at the "constructed" nature of morality, as something done, both in daily, "private" life and in "public" acts that often are portrayed in and/or constituted by the mass media. So, one theme or focus of the course is what it might mean to put these two words together in this way:"doing morality, and what some of the implications of this way of thinking might be both for the way we live our lives and pursue social change. "Social theories":The point to make here is that I haven't written "sociological theories."I'm trying to suggest that there are diverse ways of thinking about morality, troubles, problems (as well as "the good"). Some of these are indeed "sociological,"meaning they are proposed and named by professional "Sociologists" as "Sociology."You know there are several social sciences. You also know there are many other ways of thinking about this topic of morality that come from literary studies, the arts, humanities, and the natural sciences among others. "Morality" is a topic everyone feels they can (or should?) speak about. You could make a long list of adjectives to take the place of "social" here (like "literary," "marxist," "Christian," "psychological," and so on). We will not feel restricted by exclusively "Sociological" ways of speaking about morality (the capital "S" is meant to mark professional sociology and professional sociologists, which usually speak self-consciously in the name of "Sociology-the-academic discipline").
	(2)