my study method

[Aloysius]

well a BIble is obviously different as it is held to be sacred, but ultimately that's a relativist perspective. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I wouldn't mind burning a heretical book. That doesn't mean I'd want someone burning the Bible. I draw a line between what is written as truth and what is written in error.

Anyway, regardless of all that it's also a TEXT-book. I probably wouldn't do that to a novel even if I didn't like the novel... though I'd have no trouble doing it to any book that spread dangerous errors like marxism.

Actually, if I disagreed with its content but it had a good literary style, I'd still not necessarily deface it because good literary styles are hard to come by nowadays. I might lock it up in a chest labeled "Librorum Prohibitorum" but I'm a sucker for the rare modern author that can actually write well.

[Aloysius]

anyway, I don't think it's wise to respect books JUST BECAUSE they are books. it is getting increasingly easy to get something published as a 'book' nowaday... ought we to reverence the dribble? I respect a book based on its content, not the fact that it is bound and published.

[the_rev]

why don't you like sociology.... i was considering minoring in it....

[p-hawk]

Someone I knew in college's dad had gotten a degree in sociology. And he (the dad) thought it was utter bull. But hey, he made a living.

Edited September 26, 2005 by p-hawk

[Aloysius]

if you saw my book, you'd see all the socialism and communism it promotes.

sociology as a concept is not bad, i.e. studying social interaction (though I really don't like to overanalyze everyday life cause it takes away from the romance and adventure of it all) is a worthy cause. however:

modern sociology (that's sort of redundant, all "sociology" is de facto modern) tends to label as much as possible a "public issue" that has to be dealt with by government and the public, automatically tending towards socialism. saying poverty is the fault of society and declaring those in it nearly absolutely blameless is indicative of a pessimistic view of the human person. I am more optimistic and believe man, made in the creative imagio dei, has the innate power to overcome any situation by building for himself a world in which he can succeed. When they say of all the poor that it is absolutely not their fault and it's all society's fault, it's setting the stage for socialism to be considered good.

Anyway, all the so-called "classic" sociologists are either marxists or socialists. extreme functionalism seems like the parody and epitome of a modernist conservative capitalist... and then there's conflict theory that promotes class warfare... it's all aimed towards this idea that socialism is the best cure for it all.

not to mention my book (and my professor) glazes over liberation theology [i]briefly[/i] mentioning that it is "controversial" but otherwise labeling it a catholic movement that merely makes big bad ol' religion care for the neglected poor :rollseyes:

I don't have a problem with the concept of sociology per se, but its manifestation in my text book and what seems to be the prevailing if not th ONLY acceptable view in sociological circles is evil socialism.