'I am thinking' is irrefutable because 'I am not thinking' nevertheless displays oneself thinking.
-- p. 858

The book 'The Sociology of Philosophies' purports to be 'The first comprehensive history of world philosophy,' as well as 'a social history of global intellectual life.' Collins in this book takes as his subject the whole of human intellectual endeavour, exploring the strands and developments of philosophical thought in all the major cultures of the world.

Collins begins this weighty and, at times, hyper-intellectual tome by building a theory of intellectualism, ritual, education, and philosophical reflection. He identifies two of the longest and most dominant philosophical strands as being those arising in Greece and China.

Collins posits the theory that intellectual pursuits do not arise in a vacuum, and are more of a societal and communal development than an individual pursuit or achievement.

'That ideas are not rooted in individuals is hard to accept because it seems to offend against a key epistemological point. Here the question is analytically distinct from the propensity to worship intellectual heroes.'

However, when one looks at the history of ideas, they usually arise in groups. While there are certainly key individuals who arose at different times in history, it is also true that there are patterns -- the age of philosophy in Greece, the Renaissance in Italy, etc. There is a particular atmosphere and sociological aspect to the culture that encourages and develops intellectual development that is unique to each, and leads to differing developments.

After exploring this history and the rituals of intellectuals and intellectualism (which is little acknowledged among scholars in the West), Collins explores who the major individuals are, who the minor individuals are, and what places they occupy in the chain of intellectual history. These chains are most pronounced in developments from Greece and developments from China; the Chinese strands continue through almost all subsequent Eastern thought, which is always responding to or reacting against key ideas formed there; in Western thought, almost all philosophical and intellectual development does the same with regard to the Greek development.

Collins proceeds from this to a theoretical framework (in which he develops more closely the Greek philosophical reflective framework, being the one from which Collins was educated, and thus the dominant underpinning of his writing) that explores the importance and rarity of true creativity. From this, he continues, doing a comparative analysis of intellectual communities, drawing in, in addition to Ancient Greece and Ancient China, India, Japan, Neo-Confucian China, Medieval Christendom, Islamic philosophies, Jewish philosophical development, then surveying modern western philosophies, French, German, and British.

Strong historical themes, political and other intellectual developments (such as the shift from faith-based to experimental-based knowledge and the rise of scientific method and mathematical objectivism) are included in his analysis. Collins concludes this work with Meta-Reflections, in which he explores the sequence and branches in the production of ideas socially (exploring the future of philosophy, which Collins states is 'a partisan theme which announces that the era of foundational questions is over. The call for the end of philosophy is recurrent, a standard ploy in intergenerational rearrangements, usually a prelude to a new round of deep troubles and new creativity.'

Collins' meta-reflections also include an epilogue on sociological realism. The quote that starts this review comes from this section. Self-evident truths are explored here.

'Virtually no one actually doubts the reality of the world of ordinary experience. It is only within specialised intellectual networks that the question has arisen whether this banal reality can be proven to a high standard of argument; and even intellectuals, when they are 'off duty', go back to assuming the reality of the ordinary time-space world.'

Sociological realism accepts the world as it is, which is not always the case with philosophy, even though philosophy purports to explain the world. This is a disconnect that occurs frequently in history. Collins further looks to mathematics and 'rapid-discovery science' for complications and developmental pieces in the intellectual history of the world.

Collins includes an extensive bibliography (worth the value of the book in itself), indexes of persons and of ideas, keys and timelines to figures, and a very interesting appendix entitled 'The Clustering of Contemporaneous Creativity', in which the ebb and flow of intellectual development on a global scale is examined and shows interesting results. He charts here the 'cultural production' of intellectuals, and their influence on their respective cultures. He traces such developments across hundreds of major and minor figures, determining fewer than 20 'isolates' in any cultural strand, and those being only among the minor figures.

This book, THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES by Randall Collins, is large. If I had a lot more time, I might search the text and all of its charts for the name of David Friedrich Strauss, author of the German study, THE LIFE OF JESUS CRITICALLY EXAMINED translated into English by George Eliot in 1845. There is no listing in the index of this book for Strauss, but the name D. F. Strauss appears in the text in a paragraph on page 621 which also mentions Darwin, and on some charts, such as Figure 13.1 GERMAN NETWORK, 1835-1900: NEO-KANTIANS, HISTORICISTS, POSITIVISTS, PSYCHOLOGISTS on page 690, where it even appears in a rectangle like the names Hegel, Schelling, Hegel again, and Schleiermacher near the top of the chart. The rectangles might indicate a level of fame that assumed that certain of their books had been read, though George Eliot once wrote, "but I do not know one person who is likely to read the book through, do you?" Similarly, by size, this book might be considered the most professionally encompassing but intellectually democratic attempt to offer a theory (the law of small numbers) that approaches philosophical thought in the manner which socialized religion has used to convert religious belief to something which it can find useful.

While some outstanding experts on humor, like Freud and Heine, are mentioned in this book, the index does not provide lists for jokes. I tried looking up the key terms in the line, "Science is a sacred cow." The number of entries on Schools, Science, and Secularization only list a few pages, from 609 to 613, on anti-scientific intellectuals. There are no entries for Cow, but it would be between the listings for Courts and courtiers and for Creativity, which includes a bit (see pages 44-46, 52) on a discussion of emotional energy. Comedy would be found between the listings for "Cogito ergo sum" and Conflict as source of intellectual change. Instead of offering comedy as a subject, the index suggests, "See also Opposition, division of attention space by." (p. 1091). That's close enough for me.

The first review below focused on the theoretical position of this book. I'll put some complementary remarks on that review.
1.Collins's theoretical approach is known as network theory in the field of sociological theories. it was derived from the exchange theory. its premise come from rational choice theorem of neoclassical economics. overall analyses of exchange theory and network are similar. But Collins's analysis in this book is a bit different. in network theory, the network is considered as resource or exogenous factor to the function of individual action. But Collins treats it as causal or determinant factor not simply environmental reference point. Theoretical position of scholar is determined by incumbent fractions of the field. Not only one¡¯s preference but currently unoccupied terrain determines one¡¯s position in the attention space of scientific community.
2.Collins demystifying the romantic perception of knowledge production: knowledge or art is not the offshoot of genius but that of community. In this regard, Collins take the point of sociology of science not sociology of knowledge. The former perceives the knowledge as determined or affected by external factor of network, while the latter does by class or socioeconomic interest. They seems not that different. But quite different actually. The latter take the content of knowledge or artwork as dependent variable against the independent variable ie, the broad framework of class interest. It¡¯s the basic position of traditional Marxist. But Sociology of science narrows the scope of independent variable down to community of scholars. And the works of scholar is seen as commodity in the marketplace. Here the reward is not money but the fame.

In this well-written and important book, Hilbert demonstrates how key themes in classical social theory were lost or 'inverted' by Talcott Parsons. Hilbert goes on to show how Garfinkel's 'Studies in Ethnomethodology' (1967), and related work by other early ethnomethodologists generated a body of knowledge regarding actual social practices that stood Parsons on his head, thereby unintentionally 'recovering' some of the key insights lost to American Sociology through Parson's interpretation of Durkheim and Weber. A thought-provoking book whose insights can fuel further empirical work explicating the actual processes of the social world.

In this well-written and important book, Hilbert demonstrates how key themes in classical social theory were lost or 'inverted' by Talcott Parsons. Hilbert goes on to show how Garfinkel's 'Studies in Ethnomethodology' (1967), and related work by other early ethnomethodologists generated a body of knowledge regarding actual social practices that stood Parsons on his head, thereby unintentionally 'recovering' some of the key insights lost to American Sociology through Parson's interpretation of Durkheim and Weber. A thought-provoking book whose insights can fuel further empirical work explicating the actual processes of the social world.

This was my first book on sociology, and I must admit that I thoroughly enjoyed Collins' description of the branches that compose modern sociology and the frontiers of knowledge in the field. As an economist, I was especially interested in the "rational" school, and was not disappointed. Of course many of the scholar transcend economics and sociology (Herbert Simon, Mancur Olson), but I found it interesting to see concepts that I had treated as predominantly economic from a different perspective. Also interesting to read about Marx in the context of all other who followed him in the "conflict" tradition.

This book is great for those who would like to have an overall good knowledge of sociology without spending the time to read the actual founders of the field's works.

Collins' work is a must for the serious scholar of sociology. He is able to "boil-down" the four major theories in sociology, without resorting to the confounding language of the original authors. This work succinctly outlines the four major theories and gives some of the more lucid quotes of the "fathers" of classical theory. Finally a sociology text that does not presume familiarity with the subject matter.

A most revealing explanation of American life and the educational explosion, its creation and effects.

very well written. offers a very easy to read style by stressing the biographical and historical context of each theorist. covers early sociological theory to such recent philosopher/sociologists as michel foucault. well done!

In this book, Collins instroduces several precepts that most of us have never thought about before. It's guaranteed to challenge some of your most dearly-held beliefs about selfishness, social conhesion, religion, marriage, power and other enigmatic topics. He guides 'dear reader' gently and is without the 'in your face' style of some social theorists, which makes a book you'll buy with nary a reservation for some of your most conservative friends.

All in all, a great introduction to sociology. It's written at a college freshman level, which makes it a great beginner's book, but you'll find yourself referring back to it again and again through the years - promise.

Two thumbs up for Collins!

This book is legendary. Max Weber arguably was the first social scientists who devoted his life's work to cross-cultural studies. His pioneering study of "The protestant ethic..." combines a broad, almost universal, vision of human desires and ideas with painstaking details of how certain religious movements transformed the economic basis of feudal Europe, and later the United States, into an economy of competition and free enterprise. The drive in early capitalism, Weber shows, was an inherent
religious belief in money as a means of eternal salvation. Trough accumulating more wealth, capitalists were trying to prove for themselves that they were worthy of God's grace and hence were secured an afterlife in Paradise. However, spending money was not an option for these capitalists. It was considered a sin to use capital gains to satisfy carnal and worldly desires ( compare with Enron and Worldcom executives). Wealth was in many ways protected by a fear of God.

Weber's Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is CLASSIC - and should be a mandatory read for every student of sociology. Unfortunately, the classic literature of sociology isn't emphasized enough in today's educational institutions. Students are entering the real world without the foundation of social prophets and coming up with their own ideas of "what the world is coming to," and taking credit for ideology that has long been debated and written down by masterminds such as Weber. Pay attention! What is this book really about? This is a revolutionary work discussing critically the causes and effects of sociological chance, and how the sociology of religion has changed meaning because of the philosophy we now base our ideas on. Anyone interested in postmodern theory, the iron cage of bureaucracy, rationalization, and even symbolic interactionism should read this before continuing to literature of modern sociological thought.

THE PROTESTANT ETHIC AND THE SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM by Max Weber is the kind of book which I imagined was important in my youth. I find it difficult, now, but not because anything which is says is any less true than it ever was. As history goes, it is some of the most thoughtful. The problem is that we are no longer living in history. Comparing ourselves to the contents of this book confirms that society is now at the level of farce, and likely to remain so. This conclusion might not strike anyone starting the book for the first time, but it ought to grab anyone who is capable of comprehending Chapter 3, "Luther's Conception of the Calling."

My point of view works best if it is accepted that, as America now stands, it can only be understood as a nation of shoppers. The large and still growing amount by which imports exceeds exports requires that the entire world maintains this view for monetary stability. The political parties might pretend to be theoretically split between those who use the government as a means of shopping for people's needs and those who would enhance the ability to make big bucks, but neither party can, in actuality, represent with their whole heart those who picture government as the ultimate shopper, which ought to be able to provide people with what they would not otherwise have, whether through liberal social programs or by imposing rigid security provisions and covert activities. Thinking about how well secret military tribunals or jailing users of illegal substances actually functions, as applied to "others," strike me as being an absurd application of Luther's "observation that the division of labour forces every individual to work for others." Both parties, to maintain their existence in such a tipsy world, must appeal to those who would maintain "the privileged position, legal or actual, of single great trading companies." Only the American ability to convince the world that everyone who takes our money for their products fully shares the ability of Americans to benefit from such great wealth can maintain such a situation as "a traditionalist interpretation based on the idea of Providence. The individual should remain once and for all in the station and calling in which God had placed him, and should restrain his worldly activity within the limits imposed by his established station in life. While his economic traditionalism was originally the result of Pauline indifference, it later became that of a more and more intense belief in divine providence, which identified absolute obedience to God's will, with absolute acceptance of things as they were." The uses of two "Absolute"s in that sentence is what frightens me. Any sign of inability to adapt to a future which includes vast changes is a bad characteristic for a modern society, and the modern economy seems to be headed in a direction that will no longer provide great wealth to all who expect it. In such a situation, anyone might consider the words of Milton in "Paradise Lost," as quoted by Max Weber, which points out that people are able:

To leave this Paradise, but shall possess
A Paradise within thee, happier far.

The next paragraph suggests, "The appeal to national character is generally a mere confession of ignorance, and in this case it is entirely untenable." The difference between what Max Weber is trying to describe and what I'm thinking is what makes this kind of book so difficult to read, and I wouldn't be surprised if you haven't read it.

pleasantly written. offers psychoanalytic insight into the causes of weber's breakdown. does not stress processes of formal rationalization and subsequent disenchantment enough!