法院角色的社会学意义分析

对于法院角色的认识应该兼具两个方面，即内部规范的形成和法院角色形成的外部条件，在对法院角色的基础性分析和认识的基础上，也要思考法院未来的发展思路和方向。只有从不同侧面来加以分析，才能对法院在中国法制现代化中的作用有一个较为深刻的思考。     

Manual or History? Roberto Cipriani's Sociology of Religion

Roberto Cipriani's history of the sociology of religion begins with philosophical predecessors and works its way through the major writing of numerous nineteenth- and twentieth-century scholars. It places a great deal of valuable information between two covers. One can argue with the way many of the authors are grouped together, however—something that can cause problems for students. And some important personages in the field, especially women who have made contributions, are omitted.     

从失范到示范:校园杀手的犯罪社会学分析

2010年发生的校园杀手系列案件并非是由于犯罪人的病态人格,而是由于社会失范状态导致的一种反抗的适应方式。当社会个体不能以制度化的手段实现文化目标时,越轨和犯罪行为就会出现。当个体与社会之间的链接纽带发生断裂时,反抗就可能以校园杀手的形式出现。对于校园杀手的预防和甄别,应该从社会链接纽带的角度开始。最好的社会政策就是最好的刑事政策。     

知识社会学能为中国法学研究带来什么

法律知识的研究是厘清中国特色的社会主义法制理论的构成、来源、基础、核心体系等根本问题的一个重要环节。知识社会学可以在分析法律知识的生产体制和创新机制、法律知识传统、法律知识的社会接受模式、法律知识与其它社会知识的整合等方面发挥重要作用。知识社会学在上述领域的渗入对具有中国特色的社会主义法制理论的健全与发展具有重要的现实意义。     

我国社会学重建以来的学科发展

本文在文献分析的基础上,把我国社会学自重建以来的学科发展的基本状况,分为七个主要领域:社会发展研究,社会结构研究,社会问题、社会政策和社会工作研究,社会观念与社会心态研究,社会学基本理论研究,社会学方法研究,国外社会学研究。对每一领域的主要进展进行了回顾性总结。针对学科发展中存在的一些问题,提出了促进社会学学科长期健康发展应妥善处理的一些关系和应加以落实的几项举措。     

Industrial Relations and Justice Ideologies in the Firm: A Justice-Based Explanation of Works Council Effectiveness

This paper investigates why the effectiveness of works councils varies across firms. Drawing on a large body of literature on justice in organizations, and on the basis of the premise of methodological individualism, we present the groundwork for a justice-based theory of workplace codetermination. The theory focuses on workers' attitudes toward justice in organizations, the structural reasons behind these attitudes, and their consequences for the effectiveness of codetermination. Results from a qualitative employee survey in four German firms provide first empirical support for the theory presented.     

The role of the sociologist as mitigation expert in a sentencing hearing

This paper examines Louisiana’s habitual offender statute and the role of a sociologist as a mitigation expert/criminologist in a specific case. The paper includes a summary of the habitual offender statute; the literature/theories used by the sociologist in his testimony; the trial judge’s decision; and the decision of the three-judge panel of the appellant court, particularly the minority opinion. The case has been returned to the district court for re-sentencing and the trial judge is under no obligation to accept the panel’s decision; but in practice must justify any lenient sentence. The use of sociology as mitigation in criminal cases generally is discussed. The author has worked in over 300 criminal cases since 1988, most of which were capital murder, but also include second-degree murder, manslaughter, armed robbery, rape, and habitual offender hearings.     

La resistencia al programa fuerte en la sociología del conocimiento: la asepsia científica y la amenaza del relativismo

In this article we defend the plausibility of adopting a Strong Program in the Sociology of Knowledge. We critically analyze various objections against it; in particular, we show that the auto-refutation charge is not decisive. We offer a Mertonian hypothesis to explain the reason why the Strong Program continues to be the target of very passionate attacks and mockery, despite its prima facie attractiveness and its affinity with contemporary epistemology. Such hypothesis suggests that at least some of the passionate arguments against the Strong Program are motivated by outrage occurring as a result of the violation of a central value of scientific endeavor.     

实证主义、诠释主义与批判主义

本文介绍了西方三种流行的社会学理论 ,分析了这三种社会学理论的主要代表人物、主要观点、主要研究方法 ,对三种社会学理论的优劣进行了比较 ,并对三种社会学理论走向相互融合的前景进行了展望     

意义、价值与暴力性私力救济的发生——基于对行动的主观维度考察

人们的行动不是基于单纯的手段-目的理性,也不会完全受到结构性约束之摆布。通过对纳西族社会中发生的“殉情”历史事件、彝族的“死给”制度等个案考察,将表明暴力性私力救济的发生不仅和规则、资源、现有的纠纷解决机制等社会的客观维度有关联,它还与人们关于生活意义的思考、信仰和价值等主观方面有关系。人们的信仰、价值、意义追寻促成了暴力性私力救济。暴力性私力救济不能完全被消除,只能被限制和减少。但是,治理暴力性私力救济不能从强制改变人们的主观信念入手,只能着手于制度建构,消除引发暴力性私力救济客观因素。