Some critics observed that the classical sociologists are generally plagued by
a tragic perspective regarding the characteristic and future of modern society.
Such sense of tragedy derived from the alleged crisis that modern societies
must face, whether a material or spiritual level. While Weber and Durkheim are
both greatly interested in the role of religious belief in society, yet religion is hardly
the plight of modern society. Though Marx is more forthright in his advocation of a
Communist future, the latter is perhaps more idealistic than real.
The looming tragedy of modernity- and the human costs it entails, seems to be inescapable. Do you agree with the general characterization of the position of the three founding sociologists?
And to what extent has the 21st century been different from the early 20th century?
In your answer to these questions, and in light of the observation above,
compare the positions of Marx with either Durkheim or Weber, and assess how far they
resemble or differ from each other in so far as the tragic vision is concerned.
When you discuss the applicability of their sociological vision for the societal conditions
of the 21st century, you may also wish to use the case of Hong Kong as an empirical example.
果然不脫陳教授的風格
連final 的問題也可以這樣長 @@"
問題與自己當年的有若干相似的地方啊
也是列舉一下他們對現代社會的觀點異同之處、評估一下他們理論的應用層面等
好讓理論科不致於淪為一科紙上談兵的科目
然而難度卻加深了許多
問二十世紀和廿一世紀有甚麼不同!?
(唔係fa, 所謂廿一世紀, 亦只是過了四年半而已 一.一")
還要把他們的理論應用到香港社會之上!?
Durkhiem...應該是談到失範、要建立社會共識, 重建固有拜金價值觀及所謂是道德秩序吧
Weber... 應該是關乎三種權威的取捨, 還有面對鐵籠般的現代社會人們如何自處
再加上vocation 等問題...
但是Marx 嘛, 其理論除了那些揭露資本主義黑暗面的理論值得反思、以及其歷史唯物論
等有學術價值以外, 實在想不到在香港有其他的應用層面
(或許是作為長毛的行動指標, 或是為所謂 "心繫家國" 的愛國思潮提供必要的背景資料@@")
題目雖萬變卻不離其中
做教授可真好呢^^"
p.s. 實在可惡!
竟然在得到了牌照號碼後那隻該死的spss 碟才壞
多謝組女的厚意了^^
![[Powered By MySQL]](/images/mysql-04.gif)
Copyright Notice: All entries are copyright (and the responsibility of) their respective authors.
