Summary of P. Berger's 'Sociology: A Disinvitation?

'
In the article 'Sociology: A Disinvitation?' the author, Peter Berger, argues that there is something
wrong about sociology. P. Berger claims that between 1890 and 1930 sociologists used to deal with
'big questions', but after that they started avoiding them. Author concentrates on the failure of
sociology which is related with four important developments that have taken place since Second
World War and suggests a solution.
Firstly, P. Berger comments the cultural and political upheaval of Western industrial societies in the
late 1960s and early 1970s. It seems to be surprising that sociologists used to agree that people
become more conservative as they become more affluent. But the upheaval showed that uppermiddle-class tends to be more active and seeks for changes. Argument is that sociologists are often a
part of phenomenons. And even professional sociologists avoid accepting sociological explanations
of their own commitments.
The second case is the rapid economic ascendancy of Japan and other East Asian countries.
Sociologists were putting effort to understand this phenomena, but what they did wrong is that
many of them tried to fit their theories for unrelated situations. There was a widespread agreement
that Confucianism was an obstacle to development in Korea and in the Chinese societies, but now
this cultural heritage is commonly cited as one of the causes of the East Asian economic success
stories. This failure, according to the author, is based on a lack of knowledge and methodological
flexibility both.
The following failure P. Berger presents is a belief of secularization theory. There was a widespread
idea that in a modern society religion is loosing it's importance in social institutions and in
individual consciousness. Apparently, this premise is valid only for Europe, but not for all the
world. The reason why sociologists were mistaken is that they were reluctant to deny their
assurance and tended to ignore Iranian revolution and growth of born-again Christians. Author notes
that sociologists live in truly secularized milieus and generalize about the world from one's own
little corner.
Last argument why sociology didn't succeed is based on the collapse of Soviet Union. P. Berger
gives a reason why sociologists were not only able to explain, but also to predict a collapse of all
the socialism. It is because of scientists' allegiance to ideology and personal beliefs. Author
criticizes those who pretend to be social scientist with partial standpoint.

Finally, P. Berger suggests how to 'cure' sociology from parochialism, triviality, rationality and
ideology. He emphasizes an importance of gaining a detailed knowledge of different societies,
learning foreign languages, feeling the difference between rationality of sociology and rationality of
all the world. Professional sociologist shouldn't forget being 'value-free' and promote a
cosmopolitan, methodologically flexible and anti-ideological sociology, as it tended to be in the
classical era.
Brigita elkyt