Sociology as an Art Form

Author(s): Robert A. Nisbet

Source: The Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 5, No. 2 (Autumn, 1962), pp. 67-74
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1388389
Accessed: 23-02-2016 09:40 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Inc. and University of California Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Pacific Sociological Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Volume 5 Fall
Number 2 icialeourna Socological soiatione
Paciic
l o the 1962
OfficialJournalof the PacificSociologicalAssociation

SOCIOLOGY AS ANART FORM*

ROBERTA. NISBET
University Riverside
of California,

I admitreadilythatbothbytemperament and academic of problem-solving thought,proceedingrigorouslyand

background I havealwaysbeenmoreinterested in thenon- self-consciously fromquestionto hypothesisto verified
uses of our disciplinethantheuses. I admitfurther to be- conclusion,I havebeenunableto discoverit. On thecon-
lievingthattheoriesshouldbe testedas much by their trary,each oftheseprofoundand seminalideas wouldap-
reach as theirgrasp,theirimportanceas theirvalidity, pear to be theconsequenceof intellectual processesbear-
and theireleganceas theircongruencewithsuch factsas ing muchmorerelationto theartistthanthescientist, as
may be at hand. It is my major contention that the science the latter tends to be conceived by most of us. Apart from
ofsociologymakesitsmostsignificant intellectual advanc- processesof intuition, impressionism, iconic imagination
es underthespurof stimuliand throughprocessesthatit (the phraseis Sir HerbertRead's), and even objectifica-
largelyshareswithart; thatwhateverthe differences be- tion,it seemsunlikelythatany one of theseideas would
tweenscienceand art,it is whattheyhavein commonthat have come into being to influencegenerationsof subse-
mattersmostin discoveryand creativeness. quentthought and teaching.
I
Nothing say is intended to imply that sociology is nota For a few, no doubt,thisconclusion,if believedat all,
science.I am quite willing,for presentpurposes,to put mayseemlikethrowing vilesuspicionon trusted ancestors:
sociology on the same linewith and
physics biology,apply- like a child's discovery thathis father is a member of the
ing to each of these the essence ofwhat I say about sociolo- John Birch society or his mother a descendant oftheJukes
gy.Each is indeeda science,buteachis also a formof art, or Kallikaks.It maysmackof an anthropologist's gratui-
and ifwe forgetthiswe runtheriskof losingthescience, tous demonstration to a pentecostalcommunicant of the
finding a
ourselveswith sandheapempiricism or methodo- totemistic of
origins Christianity. But let us withhold fur-
logicalnarcissism, each as far from science as art is from ther comment on thisaspectof our subject,turning instead
billboardadvertisements. fora fewmomentsto a morefundamental and inclusive
My interest in sociologyas an art formwas stimulated matter-thehabitoftreating scienceas thoughitweresub-
recently by somereflections on ideas thatare by common stantively and psychologically different fromart.
assentamongthemostdistinctive thatsociologyhas con- It is a deeplyrootedhabit,butbyno meansuniversalin
tributedto modernthought.Let me mentionthese: mass thehistoryofmodernthought. We needgo backno further
society,alienation,anomie, rationalization, community, thantheRenaissanceto discovera timewhenartand sci-
disorganization. I willhavemoreto say abouttheseideas encewereuniversally regardedas butdifferent manifesta-
and theircontextsa littlelater.Hereit suffices to notethat tionsofthesameformofcreativeconsciousness. We know
all ofthemhavehad lastingeffect uponboththetheoretical thatLeonardoda Vincithought ofhispaintingsand his in-
and empiricalcharacterofsociology.And all haveexerted geniousworksin physiologyand mechanicsas, equally,
notableinfluence on otherfieldsof thought, scientific and artand science.The typeofthoughtand eventheoutcome
humanistic. in each did notseemsignificantly differentfromtheother.
It occurredto methatnotone oftheseideasis historical- And, threecenturieslater,Goetheseemsto have feltthe
lytheresultoftheapplicationofwhatwe are todaypleased sameway.He did notsupposethatonetypeofthought op-
to call scientific method.If thereis evidencethatany one eratedwhilehe was writingFaust and anotherduringhis
oftheseideas as firstsetforthin thewritings of suchmen remarkableinquiriesin geologyand botany.In boththe
as Tocqueville,Weber,Simmel,and Durkheim, is theresult Renaissanceand Enlightenment a radical distinction be-
* PresidentialAddressdeliveredat the annual meetingof the Pa- tween art and science would have been incomprehensible.
cificSociological Association,Sacramento,April, 1962.

Fall, 1962 67

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 When,then,did the changetake place thatproduced oppositeof art.The "mechanicarts"became,forseveral
self-consciousness in thescientistandtheartist,so likethat generations, theprimeconception of everything scientific,
of Adamand Eve aftertheFall? Like a fewotherthings placingtheirstampuponthetypeof sciencedoneand re-
thatplagueus, it was, I think,in thenineteenth century. spectedat large. It was ThomasEdison who becamethe
Beginning with social movements generated by the French. archetype of thescientistin theUnitedStates.A Willard
and
Revolution, closely connected with processes of divi- Gibbs was simplyoverlooked.
sion of labor introduced by the industrial revolution, we Graduallytheidea spreadthatscience,unlikeart,flows
finda growingtendencyin thenineteenth centuryto as- along the same methodicaland systematic channelsthat
sumethatthe artistand scientistworkin waysthatare businessor law or medicinedoes. Whatis crucial,it was
alien,evenantagonistic to one another.Gilbertand Sulli- felt,was notfreereflection, intuition, and imagination but
van were but givinglyricexpressionto what everyone rigorousadherenceto procedure.The machinein thefac-
knewwhentheywrotethatthescientist is "a matter-of-fact torywas proofthatskillcouldbe transferred frommanto
youngman,an alphabetical, arithmetical, every-day young technology, makinghumaningenuity an expendableitem.
man" whereasthe artistis "a crotchedy, crackedyoung Couldnotmethodbe theanalogueofthemachine?Several
man,an ultra-poetical, super-esthetical, out-of-the-ordinary generations ofAmericans thought thatitcould,and schools
youngman." and collegeswere filledwithstudentsdoggedlylearning
In arttherehad developed,by theend of thenineteenth whatwas thought to be scientific method-not,alas, as an
century, the view that creation works through some inscrut- aid to ratiocination but as a substitute forit.
able processcalled geniusor inspiration, neverthrough It is littlewonder,giventhe overwhelmingly practical
techniqueand experimental work.We see thisvividlyin and methodicalcharacterof AmericansciencethatEuro-
Romanticism and especiallyin thefinde siecle.Associated peanslookedfora longtimewithscantrespectuponAmeri-
withthisstereotype was theequallyfundamental one that can science.It is a safegeneralization thathad it notbeen
theartistis not concernedwithrealityor truth,but only fortheEuropeaninstitutes to whichAmericansin rising
beauty-timelesssupra-terrestrial beauty.And, forming numberwentforadvancedwork,thusacquiringa truer
thecontextofbothofthese,was thefateful viewoftheart- conception of science,Americansciencewouldneverhave
ist's role in society.Far fromadmittingany continuity burstforthfromitsshellof usefulmediocrity. To be sure
or
with, dependenceon, society, the Romantic artistem- there were those of like mind in Europe,especiallyEng-
phasizedinsteadthegulfbetweenhimand society,seeking land; thoseforwhomsciencewas profession, subjectto
in solitaryescapetheanodynethathis medievaland Ren- and limitedby rulesand techniques. Butin Europe,where
aissanceforbearshad foundin fellowship and social pur- the humanistictraditionwas strongeras the resultof a
pose. His rejectionoftheworldthatwas beingcreatedby mucholderpre-democratic, pre-industrial past,and where
theindustrial revolution was total. a mindofthestatureofFaraday'scouldrejectforhimself
But whileartwas becomingmythicized in thisfashion, thetitleofphysicist, preferring thatofphilosopher, and be
sciencewas succumbing to anothermyth,one of reverse understood and honoredforit,therewas lesslikelihoodof
characterand ofequal influence on thepopularmind.This sciencebecomingmiredin unrelievedmethodand tech-
was themyth,not of inspiration, butof method.Here,as nique.
in thecase ofart,we are dealingwithsomething relatedto
II
the industrialrevolution.But,whereasart was generally
repelledby thenewindustrial society,sciencewas virtual- The worstresultofthenineteenth century separationof
ly absorbed it. as
by Just industry began to dominate tech- art and science is not one of historical interpretation. It is
nology,technology dominated science,making it not what the continuing belief in many classrooms and laboratories
it had beenforcenturies, primarily a pursuitofthereflec- thattheobjectivesas wellas thought processesare differ-
tivemind,buta profession governedby rules and by cri- ent. At its worst, this view tells us that sciencealoneis con-
teriaof service,all of a piece withlaw, engineering, and cernedwithreality;thatart'sfunction is simplyto titillate
medicine. thesensesin a kindofaimlessquestof thedecorativeand
The newuniversities in bothEuropeand Americagave eye-pleasing.
immenseimpetusto sciencebut,to a verylargeextent,it Nothingcould be farther fromthetruth.Anyart form
was scienceof the appliedtype.In the UnitedStatesthe thatis serious,be it thenovel,poem,or painting,is con-
riseoftheLand Grantcolleges,basedin theirearliestyears cernedfirstand foremost withreality.It is interested in
on an unrelievedvocationalism, was a major stepin the throwing lightuponreality,and in somehowcommunicat-
unionofscienceand industry and in thecultivation of the ingthislightto others.Andthis,basically,is whatscience
stereotype thatscience,likeindustry, is practical,thevery -as contrasted withtechnology-isconcerned with.I ven-

68 PacificSociologicalReview

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
turethejudgementthatthereis morein commonbetween of man. Eugene Rabinowitch, distinguished chemistand
Picasso and Einstein-in objective,in inspiration,and scienceeditor,has recently written somewordsthatmight
mode of fulfillment-than thereis betweenPicasso and, fittingly hangin everyhalloflearning.
say, Norman Rockwell or between Einstein and any of the "The evolutionof thehumanmindis a singleprocess,
stolidpractitioners of whatA. N. Whiteheadonce called revealedwithdifferent intensity, different clarity,and dif-
"dustbowlempiricism."Both the artistand the scientist ferenttiming-in its variousmanifestations-inart,sci-
are drivenbythedesireto understand, to interpret,and to ence,philosophy, social and politicalthought.It is like a
communicate theirunderstanding to therestoftheworld. fugue,or an oratorio,in whichdifferent instruments or
The artist,let it be trumpeted, is notinterested in deco- voicesenterin turn.The voiceoftheartistis oftenthefirst
ration,and it is onlybecauseNon-Artists have workedas to respond.The artistis the mostsensitiveindividualin
thoughdecoration,fatuousreminiscence, and eye titilla- society.His feelingforchange,his apprehension of new
tion werethe highestends of art thatmanypersonsstill thingstocome,is likelytobe moreacutethanoftheslower-
findthemselves acceptingor rejectingan artworklargely moving,rational,scientific thinker. It is in theartisticpro-
in termsofwhether it is beautifulto theeye.Ofcourseart ductionof a period,ratherthanin its thinking, thatone
can be beautiful, butnotifit seeksbeautyas itschiefend. should search for shadows cast in advance by coming
So, let it be remembered, can sciencebe beautifulthough events,forpropheticanticipation. I do notmeanthefore-
no onewouldsupposethatevena mathematician is actuat- castoffuture events, butrathertherevelation, intheframe-
ed fundamentally the
by goal beauty.of work of artistic production, of the mental attitudes which
"The essentialnatureof art,"writesSir HerbertRead, onlylaterwill becomeapparentin otherfieldsof human
"willbe foundneitherin theproduction ofobjectsto satis- endeavour.Thustheimpending breakdownoftheexisting
fy practical needs, nor in the of
expression religious or order of things, of the generally acceptedsystemofvalues,
philosophical ideas,but in its capacity to createa synthetic should be--and often is-first recognizablein a revolt
and self-consistent world: a worldwhichis neitherthe againstthevaluesand canonsthathad dominatedartistic
world of practicalneeds and desires,nor the world of creation;a revolutionin art precedesthe revolutionin
dreamsand fantasy, buta worldcompounded ofthesecon- society."2
tradictions:a convincingrepresentation of thetotalityof Repeatedly,the historyof the West has shownthese
experience:a modetherefore ofenvisaging theindividual's wordsto be true.Historiansof bothancientand modern
perceptionof someaspectof universaltruth.In all its es- European culturehave emphasizedthe directiverole
sentialactivitiesart is tryingto tellus something:some- playedbytheartist'smind:howphilosophical and scienti-
thingabout the universe,somethingabout nature,about ficimagesofmanwereprecededby thoseto be seen first
man,or abouttheartisthimself... It is onlywhenwe have in thedrama,thesonnet,and in paintingor sculpture. This
clearlyrecognizedthefunction of artas a modeof knowl- firstbecamea vividtruthforme severalyearsago while
edge parallelto theothermodesby whichman arrivesat 2 Eugene Rabinowitch,"IntegralScience and AtomizedArt,"Bul-
an understanding of his environment thatwe can beginto letinof theAtomicScientists,15 (February,1959), p. 64. The entire
issue is organizedaroundthe theme,science and art,and containsa
appreciateitssignificance in thehistoryof mankind."'
numberof highlyperceptivepieces by both scientistsand artists.
The artist'sinterest in formis the scientist's interest in Particularlyvaluable are those by Rabinowitch,Marston Morse,
structure. In each thedesireforvisionand understanding Carl Holty,and MartinKamen and Beka Doherty.
is dominating.Each worksempirically;each strivesto Some prolonged,if unsystematic, personal questioningof scien-
tistssuggeststo me thatthereis a stratification of acceptance of the
communicate whatit findsthrougha patternor formal art element in creative science. Mathematicians and theoretical
structure requiringtechniqueforits mastery.It is worth physicists,currentlyhighin the statussystemof modernscience,are
notingthattheword"theory"comesfromthesameGreek prone to accept immediatelythe realityof intuitiveand non-logical
in scientificdiscovery.So, forthemostpart,are thosework-
rootas theword"'theatre." It means,basically,lookingfix- elements
ing in such relativelynew and highlycreativeareas as biophysics
edlyat, contemplation. It is allied withthewordimagina- and biochemistry.Geologists,todaylow in the peckingorderof sci-
tion-that is, literally, internalizing theouterworldto an ence, appear least likelyto accept or understandthe art elementin
science,althoughtheyhave much companyin the more established
imagethatthemindholdstenaciously.Bothart and sci- and formalizedareas of other disciplines, including biology and
ence,in short,dependupon the capacityfordetachment physicsand chemistry.In the behavioralsciences generallythereis
and upontheabilityto hold back fromcommitment. The a greaterinsistenceupon rigorand logic of method-and preoccu-
pation with method itself-than is true of the sciences.
essenceofeach wroteSantayana,"is thesteadycontempla- There are differences,of course, by field. Thus physical the educationists
tionofthingsin theirorderand worth." are more likelyto fluff theirscientificfeathersthan are the anthro-
in whose numberunabashed artistshave always flourished
In truth,scienceand arthavehad a profoundly import- pologists
and who have,on the whole,spentleast time on mattersof abstract
antculturalrelationship forthegreaterpartofthehistory methodology.Similarly,my experienceindicates,acceptance of the
1 Sir HerbertE. Read, Art and Society,London: W. art elementin science seems to followthe curveof personal distinc-
Heinemann,
1937,pp. x-xii. tion.I am toldthatone Nobel laureate,a chemist,dismissingmethod,
describes scientificdiscoveryas "rape followedby seduction."
Fall, 1962 69

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
goingthroughthegreatUffizi galleryin Florence.Here it Theseare important words,burningwords.Theymight
is possibleto trace,in hallafterhall,standingforage after hangovertheentranceto everymethodology seminaras a
age, the historically evolvingimages of man in Western to
prophylaxis pedantry. Too manysociologistshave as-
Europe: from the almost
spiritual, mysticaland transcend- sumed that because scientific thoughtis by definition ra-
entrepresentations ofmantobe foundin theItalianPrimi- tional and logical in expression,its psychologicalroots
tives,throughtransitionalmanifestations that are both musttherefore be limitedto strictly empiricaland logical
divineand humanin appearance,to the franklyhuman, processes.Onlythatis scientific-sorunsthe folkloreof
self-contained, and overwhelmingly men and scientism-thatproceedsfroman unambiguousand pre-
terrestrial
womenof theRenaissanceand Baroque. It is a develop- ciselydelimitedproblem,drawnfromstatistically aseptic
mentthatplainlyprecedesthe analogous transitionsof data,to a carefully tailoredhypothesis. All else is, by defi-
imagein philosophy and science.It was artwithitsswift, nition,artorphilosophy. It is hardtothinkofa betterway
encompassing, and iconic visionthatformedthe bridge to apotheosizetheroutineand insignificant.
frommedievalasceticism and corporatism to modernhum- Ofcoursescienceis concerned withproblems, withques-
anism; fromorganismto theobsessingproblemof man's tionsrootedin empiricalobservation as wellas reflection.
relationto societyand values. Like theartist,thescientist is interested in understanding
It was indeedin theRenaissance-andwhatelsewas the theworldaroundhimand in discovering significant rela-
Renaissancebut the conceptionof man and societyas tionships.But fromthelargeand incontestable truththat
worksof art?-that thewholemodernviewcameintoex- scientific thoughtis ultimately rootedin a preoccupation
istence.This is a view thathas since been modifiedin withtheunknown, in a gnawingdesireto reducetheten-
countless ways-now enhanced, nowvulgarized;nowmade sionsof uncertainty, it does not followthatscientific dis-
tragic, now trivial; sometimes ennobled, sometimes de- is
covery wholly, or even the
largely, simpleconsequence
based-but neverreallychangedafterthelate fourteenth of problem-defining and problem-solving thought.Such a
in
century Italy. Whether theobjective was thebuilding of conclusion has done much to drive sociologyintoareas of
a cathedralor a bridge,the planningof a tapestryor a studychosennotbecauseoftheirintrinsic intellectual im-
voyage to the the of a
Indies, forming gild or thestateit- portance, but because in them quantitative methodologies
self,Renaissancemansaw theworldaroundhimfromthe can workfrictionlessly.
vantagepointof the artist-scientist; not as something to The late FlorianZnanieckiforesaw,a generationago,
worshipor to manipulatebut to understandand master the trendthatthingsare taking.He was referring to the
evenas Michaelangelomasteredthemarblehe workedor already manifest influence of methodology courses."This
MarcoPolo therouteto Cathay. influence consistsin substituting tabulatingtechniquefor
The problemsand answersthatformthecoreofmodern intellectualmethods,and thus eliminatingtheoretical
cultureare thework,not of theUsefulsin societybut of thinking fromtheprocessofscientific research. . . A con-
theVisionaries, thosewhoare lostin wonderand who,not ditioncan be foreseen-indeed, ithas almostbeenreached
knowingwheretheyare going,go therefore thefarthest. -when anybodywho has learnedby heartthe various
The sameimpulseto realityand its communication drove technicalrulesand formulaeof statistics, withno other
Michaelangelo and Machiavelli alike-the one to the ma- education whatsoever and no more intelligence thana mor-
jestic David, the other to the Renaissance state--each a on, willbe able to draw from a given material all thecon-
product of the artist-scientist. clusions which statisticalproblematization makes possible
The basic affinity betweentheartistand thescientist is, S... The role of creativethinking in science,accordingto
as themathematician MarstonMorsehas toldus, psycho- thisconception, willbe reducedto thefunction of formu-
logical and spiritual. "The firstessentialbond between lating hypotheseswhich are to be testedby technical
mathematics and theartsis foundin thefactthatdiscovery means.But we have seenthatthe statisti-
onlyhypotheses
in mathematics is nota matteroflogic.It is ratherthere- cians ever have and ever can in
formulated, formulate,
sultof mysterious powerswhichno one understands, and viewoftheunavoidablelimitations oftheirmethod,areno
in whichtheunconsciousrecognition of beautymustplay
more than superficialgeneralizationsof common-sense
an important part.Outofan infinity ofdesignsa mathema-
reflection. Thereis littleplaceforcreativethought
ticianchoosesone patternforbeauty'ssake, and pulls it practical
downto earth,no one knowshow.Afterwards thelogicof AtomicScientists,op. cit.,pp. 56-57.Two recentliterarystudieshave
wordsand of formssetsthepatternright.Onlythencan shown,with impressiveimaginationand learning,how unreasonand
reason, unconscious and conscious, hunch and hypothesis,have
one tell someoneelse. The firstpatternremainsin the workedtogetherhistorically.See Wayne Shumaker,Literatureand
shadowsof themind."'3 theIrrational,New Jersey:Prentice-Hall,1960,and ErnestTuveson,
Imaginationas a Means of Grace; Locke and theAestheticsofRom-
8Marston Morse, "Mathematicsand the Arts," Bulletin of the anticism,Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1960.

70 PacificSociologicalReview

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
and evenless forscientific progressin thiskindof prob- dual psychology, and utilitarian politicalscience.Whatwe
lematization."'4 findin sociology-thatis, in its distinctive currents-isa
Despitethe candorof manydistinguished scientistsin revoltagainsttherationalist viewofman and society.
tellingabouttheirwork,and despitewhatwe are on the The secondpointis this.Not onlyare thekeyideas of
way to learningabout processesof creativity in general, sociologyunrelatedto prior"scientific" ideas; theyhave
thereis stilla greatdeal thatwe do notknowabouthow theirclosestaffinity withan art movement, Romanticism.
scientistsarriveat theirproblems,do the reallycrucial In the same waythattheRenaissanceimageof man pro-
workon them,and drawtheirbasic insights. Butthismuch ceededfrompriorcurrentsin art,so, I argue,the socio-
is clear. Such problemsand ideas, fromall thatwe can logicalimagearisesin thefirstinstancefromvisionswhich
presently learn,seem to come as oftenfromthe uncon- had theirearliestand mostfarreachingappeal in Roman-
scious as theconsciousmind; fromwide and extraneous tic art.5
reading,or fromburiedexperience, as fromthe data im- Weberhas somewherelikenedhis own conceptof ra-
mediately in view; from the "lefthanded" processesof tionalization to thepoetSchiller'searlierviewofthe"dis-
feeling and intuition as from the "right handed" impera- enchantment of theworld."He was candidand accurate.
tivesoflogicand reason.Therefore, maywe notdrawthis Tocqueville, Simmel, and Durkheimmightwellhave done
conclusion?:Anything thatshrinksthefieldofexperience likewise.FromthefirstburstoftheRomanticspiritin the
and imagination, thatin any way diminishesthe sources late eighteenth century-rising to do battlewiththeclassi-
of inspiration, thatroutinizesthe workingsof the intelli- cist-rationalist view-we findluminously revealedtwocen-
gentmind, is to be regardedwithsuspicion. tralvisions: (1) theestrangement oftheindividualfroma
growingly impersonaland disorganizedsociety(and the
III consequentspiritualinaccessibility of moderninstitutions
-city, factory, masssociety); (2) a celebrationof status
It is timeto returnto theideas in sociologyI referredto
and community-whether rural,religious,or moral-in
at the outsetof my paper. Let me describethembriefly
contrastto the individualistic and contractualsocietyof
again, for theyare indubitablythe mostdistinctive and
thephilosophes.
illuminating contributionsofsociologyto thestudyofcul-
tureand society.Thereis, first, theviewofhumanassocia- Third,and mostimportant, evenif mostelusive,are the
tion as containingendemicprocessesof disorganization, psychological affinities between the Romanticartistsand
thesociologists. It is impossible, as I havealreadysuggest-
dysfunction, call themwhatwe will.Second,thereis the
toentertain thethought thatthesemajorideas
view of the individualas alienatedand anomic.Third, ed, seriously
werearrivedat in a mannercomparableto whatwe think
thereis theperspective of community-incontrastto ra-
of as scientific methodology. Can youimaginewhatwould
tionalisticand contractualformsof relationship-involv-
havehappenedhad anyone ofthembeensubjected,at the
ing thekeyconceptsof hierarchyand status.Fourth,we
havethegreatthemeofrationalization moment following itsinception, to a rigorousdesignanaly-
as a processin his-
sis? Can anyonebelievethatWeber'svisionofrationaliza-
toryand in thewholestructure ofmodernsociety.
tion in history,Simmel'svision of metropolis, or Durk-
We knowwheretheseideas came from:fromthewrit-
heim'svisionofanomie,camefromlogico-empirical analy-
ingsoffouror fiveremarkable mindsin thelatenineteenth
sis as thisis understood today ? Merelyto ask thequestion
century:Tocqueville,Weber,Simmel,TSnnies,and Durk- is to knowthe
answer.Plainly,thesemenwerenotworking
heim.I need not enlargeupon theirformulations of the
withfiniteand orderedproblemsin frontof them.They
ideas. I am moreinterested in theprocessesby whichthe
werenotproblem-solving at all. Each was,withdeepintui-
ideas came intobeing: thatis, the contextsin whichthe
tion, with profoundimaginativegrasp, reactingto the
ideas wereuttered, thetraditions theycame out of,and,if
it werepossible,thementalstatesbehindtheideas. Obvi- worldaroundhim,evenas does the artist,and, also like
theartist,objectifying internaland onlypartlyconscious,
ously,we are limitedin whatwe can say positively, but I statesofmind.
believecertainpointsare clear.
Thereis, first, Considerone example:theviewofsocietyand manthat
the manifest discontinuityof theseideas
in thehistoryof modernsocial thought.Not one of them underlies Durkheim'sgreatstudyof suicide.Basically,it
is the view of the artistas muchas thatof the scientist.
couldhave been deducedfromthepropositions of ration-
alismon humanbehaviorthatflourished Background, detail,and characterization blendintosome-
in theEnlighten-
ment.The true heritageof the Enlightenment is to be 5 I have discussed this at greaterlengthin an article "Conserva-
tism and Sociology,"AmericanJournalof Sociology,134 (Septem-
found,notin sociology,butin classicaleconomics,indivi- ber, 1952), 167-175.See also Leon
pp. Bramson'sinterestingdiscus-
4 Florian Znaniecki,The Method of Sociology,New York: Farrar sion in his The Political Contextof Sociology,Princeton: Princeton
and Rinehart,1934, pp. 234-235. UniversityPress, 1961, Chapter1.

Fall, 1962 71

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
thingthatis iconicin its graspof an entiresocial order. re-readings(thoughhe could as a historianof science).
How did Durkheimgethis controlling idea? We maybe How different is the relationof the sociologistto a Sim-
sure of one thing:he did notget it, as thestorkstoryof mel or Durkheim. Always therewill be somethingto
sciencemighthave it,froma preliminary examinationof be gained from a direct reading;something thatis inform-
thevitalregistersof Europe,any morethanDarwingot ative,enlarging, creative. and This is precisely likethecon-
theidea of naturalselectionfromhis observations during temporary artist'sreturnto the study of medieval archi-
thevoyageof theBeagle.The idea, theplot,and thecon- tecture, theElizabethansonnet,orthepaintingsofMatisse.
clusionof Suicide werewell in his mindbeforehe exam- This is theessenceof thehistoryof art,and whythehis-
ined theregisters. Where,then,did he get the idea? We toryofsociologyis so different fromthehistoryofscience.
can onlyspeculate.He mighthavegotitfromreadingToc-
quevillewho could certainly have got it fromLamennais IV
whocouldhavegotit fromBonaldor Chateaubriand. Or, Thatsuchmenas Weber,Durkheim, and Simmelfallin
it could have comefrompersonalexperience-froma re- the scientific traditionis unquestioned. Their works,for
membered fragment oftheTalmud,froman intuition born and no morebe-
all the deep artistic sensitivity intuition,
of personallonelinessand marginality, a scrap of experi- in of art than the works of Balzac or Dick-
long thehistory
encein Paris. Who can be sure? But one thingis certain. ens do in the of The conclusion we
history social science.
The creativeblendof ideas behindSuicide-a blendfrom draw is not thatscienceand art are withoutdifferences.
whichwe stilldrawin our scientific labors-was reached Thereare real as thereare amongtheartsand
differences,
in waysmoreakinto those theartistthanto thoseofthe
of
amongthesciences.6No one asks a Picasso to verifyone
dataprocessor, thelogician,orthetechnologist.
6 Charles Morris,the philosopher,has suggestedthat the major
It is notdifferentwiththeideas and perspectives ofSim.
difference is this: bothscience and art communicateby the
mel-in manywaysthemostimaginative and intuitiveof use of ideas and although not completelydescribablein terms
representations
all thegreatsociologists.His treatment of fear,love,con- of sense experience,science typicallyseeks to make its communica-
ventionality, power,and friendship showthemindof the tions capable of identificationor verificationby the largestnumber
of whereasart tendsto insistthateach individualtrans-
artist-essayist,and it is no distortionofvaluesto placehim lateindividuals,
the originalvision into somethingpeculiarlyhis own creation.
withsuch mastersas Montaigneand Bacon. Removethe There are probablyalso interestingrole differences betweenart-
artist'svisionfromthetreatments ofthestranger, thedyad, ists and scientists,thoughthisis, so faras I can discover,a relative-
unexploredarea of study.MartylLansdorf,an artist,and CyrilS.
andtheroleofsecrecy, and youhaveremovedall thatgives ly Smyth,a scientist,in a joint article in theBulletinof the Atomic
life. In Simmelthereis thatwonderfultensionbetween Scientistsalready cited,say: "In manycontactswithhumanistand
we have noticed only one consistentdifferenceof
the esthetically concreteand the philosophically general scientificfriends
attitudes-the scientistsare jealous of theirideas; the
professional
thatalwayslies in greatness.It is theestheticelementin humanistsdo not seem to mind if someoneappropriatestheirideas
Simmel'sworkthatmakesimpossiblethefullabsorption but are outragedby a plagiarismof form."This is an importantin-
of his sociologicalsubstanceby anonymous,systematic sight,but I judge that it has morerelevanceto paintersand sculp-
tors,and possiblypoets,than to novelistsand playwrightswho are
theory.One mustgo back to Simmelhimselfforthereal certainlyas jealous of ideas, and as secretive,as are the scientists.
insight. As withDarwinand Freud,it willalwaysbe possi- Legal battlesover plots are not unknown.
bleto derivesomething ofimportance fromthemandirect- One commonlyalleged differencebetweenscientistsand artists
deservescritical comment.It is an old stereotypeof the scientist,
ly thatcannotbe gleanedfromimpersonalstatements in sedulouslycultivatedin many a seminar, that the scientist,simply
social theory. because he is scientistand not artist,is preconditionedto a willing-
This leads to anotherimportant fact.Our dependence ness, even a desire, to be displaced by the work of studentsand
others.But thisstereotypesaysmoreabout the ideal worldof science
upontheseideasand theirmakersis akinto theartist'sde- than it does about actual scientists.The desire forself-preservation
pendenceupon theartistswho precedehim.In the same is surelyas strongamong scientistsas among artists,and the evi-
that in such mattersas protectionof personaltheo-
waythatthenovelistwill alwaysbe able to learnfroma dence suggestsof
ries, hoarding data, and secretivenessof intent,theremay not be
studyand re-studyof Dostoevskior James-to learn a verysignificantrole differences.
senseofdevelopment and form,as wellas to drawinspira- Passion forself-preservation may be morefunctionalin scientific
tionfromthecreativesource-so thesociologistcan for- thoughtthan is commonly supposed. MarstonMorse, in the article
referredto above,is of thisview so faras mathematicsis concerned.
everlearnfroma re-reading of such men as Weberand He cites the famousfeudbetweenPoincar6 and his youngcolleague
Simmel. Lebesque, suggestingthe similarityof conflictand outcometo the
Bach against the workof his father,Jo-
It is thiselementthatseparatessociologyfromsomeof revoltof PhilippInEmanuel
hann Sebastian. each case the reactionswere dictatedby instincts
thephysicalsciences.Thereis, afterall,a limitto whatthe of self-preservation which,as ProfessorMorse pointsout,were clear-
youngphysicistcan learn fromeven a Newton.Having ly to the advantageof posterity.
On one point the evidence is clear. Scientistshave a far higher
once grasped the fundamental points of the Principia, sense of priority-thoughnot of competitiveness--than artists.This
he is not likelyto draw verymuchas a physicistfrom would seem to followfromthe broad differencesof context.It is

72 PacificSociologicalReview

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 of his visionsby repeatingtheprocess; and, conversely, butmustnevertheless be allowedfor.The merefactthatwe
we properly give short shrift to ideas in science thatno one are sociologists-insteadof biologistsor economists-
buttheauthorcan findsupported byexperience. The ideas means thatthereare certainendemic,unitingwaysof see-
ofDurkheimmay,as I havesuggested, be dependent upon ing the worldaroundus. Theyare valuableand unavoid-
thought-processes like those of the artist,but none of them able, butnotfinal.
wouldhave survivedin sociologyor becomefruitful for Second,therearetheIdols oftheCave-those thatcome,
otherswereit not forcriteriaand modesof communica- notfromthecharacteroftheprofession as a whole,butof
tionthatdiffer fromthosein art. thatsmallpartof theprofessioneach of us livesin. Here
The conclusion,then,is notthatscienceand artare, or we havetheidols of specialization;thehumanbutnever-
shouldbe, alike. It is the simplerbut morefundamental thelessdangeroustendency to reducetherichnessand var-
conclusionthatin bothart and sciencethe same typeof ietyof thewholeto thespecializedperspectives and tech-
creativeimagination works.And everything thatimpedes niquesthateachofus operateswithand thatalwaysthreat-
or frustrates thisimaginationstrikesat thesourceof the en to becomeas rigidand fixedas theskillsoftechnicians.
disciplineitself.This unhappily is whatis happening today Third,we have the Idols of the MarketPlace-words,
in large areas of sociologicalinstruction and research.It phrases,and neologisms thatbecomesubstitutes forideas.
is a recurrent phenomenon in philosophy and science. Who amongus has notlearnedto his advantageor disad-
Alltooofteninthehistory ofthought we findtechniques, vantageof the hypnoticfascinationthatis exertedupon
methods, and doctrines becomingpunyearthworks, hiding foundations, researchcommittees, and certaineditors,by
theviewoftheOlympianheights.How manymute,inglori- phraseology?And who does not knowof the ease with
ous Simmels,howmanyvillageCooleyslie todayburiedin whichthewordsconveying theconceptbecomethething
requiredsequencesof curriculumand in the computer itself-withresulting inability to go beyondthewords?
rooms,theirtalentsoccupiednotby development of ideas But,thegreatestand mostformidableof the Idols are
andinsights buttheadaptationoftrivialorwellwornideas thoseoftheTheatre.Here Baconhad reference to systems
to thelanguageofthemachineor theendlessreplication of of thought,systemswhich become,like bureaucracies,
studiesthat oftenshouldn'thave been done in the first theirownreasonforbeing; whereoriginalgoals have be-
place? Suchservitude is justifiedon thefalseand appalling come displaced,leavingonlythegoals of systematic sur-
ground that the student can thus be taughtthe"method"of vival and self-maintenance. It seemsto be themarkof all
science.One may observecynicallythathe sees no Sim- systems thattheirverydegreeofinitialsuccessleadsbefore
melsand Durkheimswalkingthecampustoday.I venture long to an almost ritualisticconclusion.We have all
thestatement thattherewouldhavebeennonein theirday laughedat theteacherofclassicswhosaw in theAntigone
had certaincurricularrequirements and terminological "a veritabletreasurehouse of grammatical peculiarities."
fashionsbeenthenin existence. And for this teacher'sstudentsthe classicswere indeed
Whichleadsmeto myfinalobservations. I havestressed killed.Butwhydo we notlaughalso at theteacherofsoci-
theartelementin sociologynotbecauseI thinkthevillain ologywhointroduces his students notto therichand end-
is the machine-any morethanit is the machinetender lesslydiversified fieldofsocialand culturalexperience but
whooccasionallywalkslikea social scientist. The danger, to dull and potentially alienatinganalysesof fashionable
if I mayindulgemyselfin thepresidential prerogative of systemsand methodologies. Is not at leastpartof the at-
the sermon,is non-technological; it is sociological;it is tractiontodayofthenaturalsciencesforthegiftedstudent
thesystematics and thedogmaticsthatalwaysthreaten to theassurancethathe willbe introduced immediately to the
seepintothecellarsofintellectual thus
disciplines, driving materials and problems of science and not to thelocutions
outtheartelements. For art'swaris withsystembuilding, of systems?Systemsso easilybecomebureaucracies ofthe
notscience.I knowofno betterwayofexpressing thisthan spirit,subjectto the same pettifogging rulesand regula-
in theformthatFrancisBacon chosethreecenturiesago. tions.
That is, in theformof theIdols of theMind. Let us call Artabhorssystems, and so does all creativity. History
themtheIdols oftheProfession. is thegraveyardof systems, and thisis preciselywhySim-
There are, first,you will remember, the Idols of the meland Cooleyand Sumnerremainfreshand valuablefor
Tribe.Theseare theinclinations, perspectives, and modes us todayand whyfewreadSpencerorWard.How oftendo
ofperception thatarecommonto all; theyare unavoidable, system-builders producestudentswho are themselves cre-
highlyunlikelythat anythingin the historyof art resembleswhat
ative and viable?The system killeth,the insight givethlife.
Robert Mertonhas emphasizedin his studies of priorityin science Whatremainstodayof nominalism, realism,sensational-
or what FrederickReif has described as prevailingpractice among ism, and all theothersystems thatonceparad-
pragmatism,
physicistsin an article,"The CompetitiveWorld of the Pure Scien-
tist,"Science, 134 (December 15, 1961), pp. 1957-1962.
ed overthe landscapeof Europe? Dead, all dead.Godlives,
Blakewrote,in thedetails.I amendthisto say he livesin
Fall, 1962 73

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
theinsights,
theintuitions, theimaginations oftheartist.I
cannot betterconclude than withone finalexcerptfrom
MarstonMorse.
"The creativescientistlives in 'the wildnessof logic'
wherereasonis thehandmaiden and notthemaster.I shun
all monuments thatare coldlylegible.I preferthe world
wheretheimagesturntheirfacesin everydirection, like
themasksofPicasso.It is thehourbeforethebreakofday
whenscienceturnsin thewomb,and,waiting,I am sorry
thatthereis betweenus no signand no languageexceptby
mirrorsof necessity. I am gratefulforthepoetswho sus-
pectthetwilight zone.
"The moreI studytheinterrelations oftheartsthemore
I am convincedthateverymanis in partan artist.Certain-
ly as an artisthe shapeshis ownlife,and movesand touch-
es otherlives.I believethatit is onlyas an artistthatman
knowsreality.Realityis whathe loves,and if his love is
lostitis hissorrow."7
7 Morse, op. cit.,p. 58.

74 PacificSociologicalReview

This content downloaded from 86.36.49.248 on Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:40:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions