Social Sciences Books

I had this book for SOC381, Men and Masculinity.

great read, some of the articles are hard to read (just a tonne of quotes and statistics... no depth)

I reccomend it

It would be nice if when you are offered to "look inside" the book, the copy you are looking through is the edition that you are buying instead of one ten years older. This "look inside" option is not helpful if it is an old edition.

Don't let the fact that this book is edited by two men fool you. This book treats white, heterosexual men as sadistic oppressors and is driven by a women's studies/feminist and sometimes Marxist agenda.

You can get the complete summary of the book from this quote contained in it: "Heterosexual men maintain their status by the oppression of gay men; middle-aged men can maintain their dominance over older and younger men; upper-class men can exploit working-class men,; and white men can enjoy priviledges at the expense of men of color."

(I am not sure here whether a middle aged gay man dominates a young heterosexual, but I digress...)

If you want to find a positive image of (non-gay) men it is not here.

Articles include (with a quote from each article):

Men on Rape , "Rape may be America's fastest growing violent crime; no one can be certain because it is not clear whether more rapes are being committed or reported." (uh, so therefore let's just assume it is true as a basis for the article...)

Getting Off on Feminism, "There has to be a difference between being straight and being a breeder. And breeding is just one of the many assumptions that our culture applies to male heterosexuality." (Written by a feminist male who is really much too worried about what all his feminist pals think of him)

Life Styles of Gay Husbands and Fathers, no quote. A balanced article about the experiences of males who figure out they're gay after being married and having children. This book has a very high gay to straight ratio in articles however that overstates the prevalence of homosexuality among men.

Fraternities and the College Rape Culture, "A rape culture is strengthened by rules that permit alcohol only at fraternity parties. Under this system, men control the parties and dominate the men as well as the women that attend." (This actually was an evenly balanced article that focused on how to structure organizations and events to reduce the potentiality of rape)

The Fathers' Rights Movement: Contradictions in Rhetoric and Practice, "Indeed, fathers want to play a role in their children's lives, but for most, that role is merely a continuation of their predivorce role of the traditional father who exercises his power and control." (the "but for most" helps the authors dismiss my anecdotal evidence of being a single parent. Note we can say "single mother" easily and understandably but "single father" requires explanation so we have to resort to "single parent".)

The grammatical errors in the quotes are from the book and are not typos.

Some articles use made up statistics, gross generalities, and outright distortions to make their point. Many of the articles are balanced in and of themselves but, taken as a whole collection in this book, present a distorted view of "Men's Lives."

I have stumbled upon one of Michael Kimmel's articles regarding men's behaviors. I emailed him and asked some hard questions regarding his feministic attitudes. He could not answer any of my questions. For example, I asked him why he is so focusd on "correcting" men's behaviors when society and feminists and many women today view men as doofus, murderers, rapists, etc, as evidence by movies, commericals, TVs... Basically men are not respected while at the same time, women only programs are popping up all the time! Furthermore, I commented that in order to finetune men's "bad behaviors", one must also addresses women's attitudes toward men! He failed to answer and only ask me to be openminded and attend one of the women's courses and called me angry!

While some reviewers seem to state that Kimmel and Messner are painting men in a particularly bad light, these reviews seem to miss the key points that the authors are trying to make: the problem is masculinity and the way men perform masculinity, not males themselves. Kimmel and Messner critique gender and all the stereotypes surrounding it to present a manual for understanding masculinity as a social construction. Some articles in this reader are less helpful than others but overall it is a great introduction to masculinity studies and I highly recommend it. The book presents a variety of men's voices while sadly leaving out men with disabilities and trans men. The book cities arenas of oppression and explains how men AND women contribute to a culture where oppressive masculinity is allowed to reign.

I had to read this book for summer reading for an AP Gov course. It was a dreadful experience. It was very difficult to force myself to read more than one chapter per sitting because of the book's repetitiveness and dullness. If you actually want to read it, let me save you the time while I summarize it:

-Spend more time hiking than working.
-Don't get a well paying job, because it will make you miserable and you will undoubtedly go into dept.
-take a low paying job, because life will be great. As long as you dont want to buy anything.
-Don't buy material goods that make you happy.
-Only nature and people make you happy.
-Rich people, 90% of the time are littering, stuck-up, scumbags.

pack that into 250 pages, and there you go.

I read a first edition (2001) from the library and while the book is good it is very dated. Newer edition may improve the suggestions part as that was where i feel the book was weakest. Excellent history of consumption in the US.

I bought this book after deciding it had a cool cover and reading a couple reviews promising to provide me insight. Maybe it would have, but I simply cannot read this because within the first few paragraphs I've noticed the following:

1. The common video rental store Blockbuster has been called "Blockbuster's" by the author. Not only is this just incorrect, but it doesn't even make sense.

2. A reference to a "Nintendo Play Station" has been made.

This perturbs me in all manner of ways because I feel like if I'm to submit myself to a few authors' collective views on our culture and society, they should AT LEAST know more about it than me. That is, they should know how to use apostrophes, what the name of Blockbuster is, and what a Sony PlayStation is.

Additionally, as I flipped through the book to decide if I wanted to read any more, I noticed that the writing is overtly pretentious and not really interesting, and also that the book is filled with these "witty" little cartoons reminiscent of the political garbage you see in newspapers.

Not recommended.

Odds are you're infected with affluenza but, don't worry, there is a cure. You'll just need to take the medicine. This book is both entertaining and thought provoking.

Take an honest look at the degree of your illness, make some changes to how you think and the results could amaze you. They say the best things in life are free but some of us had to buy this book (the book's not free) to really appreciate that.

This book quite literally changed my life in a great way. Upon reading the introductory chapters, it was clear to me that I surely had Affluenza. Continuing through the book, I realized how dire it was that our whole country was "infected" and how deeply. Finally, it offered real solutions to combating the disease.

I know the analogy of Affluenza as a disease seems a little cheesy, but it was effective in getting the point across. After reading the book, it became so clear to me that my time is so valuable and that careers that don't allow you to have your personal time (to explore your hobbies) in lieu of a fat paycheck just aren't worth it. I have made so many adjustments in my life to create less waste. But more than anything learning to "want less" is such an important lesson that so very many people in our materialistic culture just will never understand. And they aren't fully to blame because our culture promotes it and its essentially brainwashed into us.

If you're already thinking that you you spend too much, that you always want more and new things, that you're in a job that you don't feel in any way is your calling, that you waste too much, and ultimately that you want to be a better person, READ THIS BOOK. It will inspire you in ways you never imagined....

I could not finish reading the book, because I could not take the authors seriously. The many misspellings and mechanical errors were far to distracting. This text is a worthy example of how NOT to write a book.

As the media becomes one of the most dominant means by which we frame our social reality, it becomes crucial for each of us to understand how media can become a mean to someone's own end. An excellent treatment of hegemony and dominant/ prefered readings. This should be a required text in all communication/ social science programs. But it ain't bad readin' for anyone else who consumes media either, namely you!

An excellent reader explaining the media's role in perpetrating common stereotypes of historically marginalized people. Includes analysis of advertising, sexual representation, TV and music. An excellent textbook for cultural studies.

broad and complete view point on the issues that face college critics in media fields. Most comprehensive text I have been required to buy with my major. Would highly recommend to other prof.s

First, let me say that the premise of each article was great for a 400- or 500-level college course and prompted many heated discussions.

But, along the lines of the other reviewer... how are we to take it seriously when we come across dozens of grammatical errors, missing words (the most prevalent error) and punctuation disasters? It read as though the articles were submitted, read by a third-grader and then stuffed hurriedly into the book for publication. A quick read by the "editors" would have found the vast majority of errors.

This is not something isolated, for 3 out of the 4 textbooks I have been assigned this summer session have dozens (yes, "dozens") of grammatical, typographical and punctuation disasters -- books well into their 2nd, 4th and 7th editions. No wonder kids graduating college habitually spell "too" as "to."

Fix the errors before you print the third edition!

This is a very good introductory book on the philosophie of science. As an inexpert in the area I enjoyed reading this book which does not include nonsense writings and unnecessary lengthy details. It is cheap in price and I recommend it to every scientist.

Tarek musslimani

At just 134 small (4.5 x 6.5") pages this book is a bargain in both time and cost. The book starts with a short history of modern science (Aristotle, Copernicus, and onward). Using some of the work of Karl Popper and falsifiability, Okasha proceeds to define science, but also points out the failures of Popper's demarcation. There is a short summary to deduction and induction, but counters induction with Hume's problem. The major problems of explanation in science including covering law, symmetry, irrelevancy, and causation, are all discussed. The chapter on realism and anti-realism, perhaps becomes more esoteric, but is an important topic. Thomas Kuhn, and "The structure of scientific revolutions" is an important topic, but perhaps the pages on Kuhn's legacy is not thorough, (but the reader is left with references to pursue!). The paragraphs on biology and "science and religion" in light of "Intelligent design" debates, are of most interest, but coverage is cursory, and other sources are available (I recommend Edward Larson's Summer for the Gods on the Scopes Trail). Photographs and diagrams throughout the book, give some historical examples. Well worth the time!

What do philosophers think about science? This book provides a brief history of the philosophy of science, describes some logical assumptions in the practice of science and problems in science, and discusses Thomas Kuhn's scientific revolutions. The book concludes with a discussion on science and society.

Philosophy of science, as described in this book, seems to have become a rather esoteric subject removed the daily practice of scientists and the everyday use of science. Some questions that spring to mind but which are not covered in this book: Does the publication and independent verification of results lead to the self-correcting nature of science? Why is the simplest explanation the best? How can scientists who cannot easily perform experiments, such as astronomers and sociologists, make verifiable theories?

Chapter 6 presents three problems in science: Newton's view of absolute space, the classification (by feature or by genetics) of living creatures and the whether the mind is modular or not. It's not clear to me how the philosophy of science can help in resolving these problems. Newton's view was probably driven by his desire to prove the literal truth of the Bible. In this day and age of automated indexing systems, does it really matter which method is used to classify creatures? Finally, shouldn't scientists collect more data before deciding if the mind is modular or not?

This book covers a number of topics in the field but fortunately doesn't get bogged down in a deep technical discussion on any single topic. It is a reasonable overview of the topic for the interested reader and one of the better books in the "Very Short Introduction" series.

Kam-Hung Soh, 19 January 2006.
http://kamhungsoh.blogspot.com

In my opinion, this book is probably the best available introduction to the philosophy of science. It is also suitable for review purposes for those who already have some familiarity with the subject.

The book manages to cover much ground in a short space because it is written very concisely, yet it is also easy to read because the writing style is very clear and straightforward.

I warmly recommend this book without hesitation.

I am a layman learning about Evolutionary Biology. Naturally I've been drawn into the ID/Evolution debate (in some cases on this site) and as part of that debate you end up talking a lot about what science really is, and particularly, what is a Theory. Lots of opponents of evolution cry out that it is ONLY A THEORY. True, but it is a theory (as I learned from this book) in the same sense as all other "theories"; such as the theory of gravity, theory of electricity, etc.! And so on... so anyway, I felt I needed to understand more about the "science of science".

I picked this up to get that brief education and I was richly rewarded. It provides a thorough but concise introduction to the Philosophy of Science. It covers the main topics and gives summaries of the major points of view. It gives references to further reading and even provides some charts and graphics. I now feel equipped to at least discuss the basic problems of the philosophy of science and now know where to go get more information.

My only criticism is the chapter that describes a specific problem in the philosophy of science from 3 of the main branches of science (Physics, Biology, and Psychology). I thought the Biology and Psychology examples were pretty weak - they didn't seem like much of a controversy today or terribly relevant. The controversy in Biology between Cladistics and Phenetics has some historical interest, but doesn't seem to be a pressing current issue (but I'm not a professional biologist, either, in all fairness).

That small issue aside, it was a great read. I recommend it and I'm going to go buy and read some more of the books in this series.

What shocked me most about Smolin's account of string theory is his claim that many of its leading lights pay rather little attention to mathematical rigor or even to a clean definition of their mathematical concepts. If this is indeed true, it would be a major scientific scandal, particularly as string theory has now been an important academic enterprise for a quarter century. This is a pity, as many had high hopes for string theory as a framework for unifying gravity with the other fundamental forces and resolving some of the conceptual inconsistencies that arise from treating particles as points.

The problem in judging Smolin's claims is that theoretical physics has become so technically and conceptually complicated in the last one hundred years that even a mathematically well-trained individual from another discipline can find it very difficult or impossible to penetrate the arguments being presented in the original scientific publications.

Aside from his criticism of string theory, Smolin makes an inspiring argument for new approaches to unsolved problems in physics, among which he includes unifying general relativity and quantum theory, establishing sounder foundations for quantum mechanics, unifying all particles and forces as manifestations of a single fundamental entity, explaining the constants used in the theory, and resolving the puzzle of dark matter and energy in cosmology. The book helpfully names and discusses a number of theorists the author thinks are currently making the most interesting contributions to solving these problems.

The chapters on the sociology of academic physics will be unsurprising to anyone who has attended graduate school. However, if Smolin's revelations about groupthink and sloppy mathematics in the physics profession are even half true, they raise concerns about governance and risk management in major physics experiments.

Lee Smolin presents his case not for why string theory should be dropped, but why other theories should be pursued more vigorously. Rather than demonizing string theory, Smolin looks at the theory's successes and failures and then moves beyond that to discussing the sociology of science in general, and this is his main issue. Smolin says the system is set up to keep alternative theories out, while the fashionable theories get all the attention, and that this system is perhaps the reason why theoretical physics has been stuck for so long. Great book.

So many reviewers have said so many things, let me just add this: During the past thirty years, we have seen the rise of religious ideology and its disastrous effects on our political system, not to mention our national finances and national reputation.

How interesting that science has experienced the same things, the same disasters born of the same focus on ideology rather than factuality, in the same time period.

This book is the first BIG public demonstration that this period may be coming to an end.

The disaster of string theory, and the Irag war, both prove the same thing: ignoring the dictates of reason, and setting aside facts for fantasy, always leads us to the same place: nowhere we want to be!

Thank you Lee Smolin.

A must-have for anyone interested in their world. And an instant classic.

Peter Shor provides an excellent summarizing review of the first half to three-quarters of the book. But he largely skimped on what I think Smolin's main focus was, based on reading Smolin's website and the author's notes in the book, when he began the book. The last few chapters are concerning the role of academia in maintaining integrity throughout their ranks. If Smolin is correct, and this book provides excellent support to believe so, this has not been done with string theory, regardless of whether it is a correct theory or not. It is an extremely volatile subject that is likely to explode in the next few decades, and not only in physics but all academic fields.

I feel the situations is complicated, but can be roughly simplified as the selfishness and fear of a group of highly respected (and sometimes also highly paid, but not always) individuals who perceived that they were not making any progress and seek to protect their respected status through manipulation. They are essentially echoing an everyday experience - even the most ignorant person can seem quite capable if they merely exude enough self confidence. Well, according to the accounts by Smolin and many others, the string theorists are doing exactly that - holding onto excessive and unfounded confidence. Unfortunately, the first step in gaining knowledge is to admit that you already possess none.

Smolin takes a much less accusational stance than I do here, but he spends a significant amount of time in his book discussing this issue and it should not be left out of the reviews.

--G. Hill

Lee Smolin, a fair-to-middling popularizer of physics vents his anger at himself and others for pursuing the chimera of an 11 (or more) dimensional universe and a "theory" that produces 10^500 distinct theories. Unfortunately for the reader, Smolin manages not to define his terms, and gives no clue to how this number of 10^500 was arrived at, nor even what a distinct theory means.

The book is almost solely interesting for its treatment of the sociology of string theory and the way its practitioners monopolized high energy particle theory for much more than a decade.

As a college student, I have to say that to find a good deal on textbooks is not easy. The book I purchased was a used textbook that was a lot cheaper here than if I were to have purchased it used at the campus bookstore. It was shipped very quickly. I am very happy. Thanks for saving me some money!

Similar to the review below, I find this book invaluable every time I teach COMS 101 or its equivalent. Not only does the book offer a wealth of information pertaining specifically to the study and field of Communication, but it offers a great deal of visceral information to supplement its core material interesting anecdotes and digressions. The supplemental material proves to be useful in *waking students up* to the lectures at hand.

I have read earlier books by Pearson--they were good, but this book is spectacular. As a classroom teacher, I appreciate the supplements that come with the book. My students responded very well to the first six chapters and to the public speaking chapters.

Ana excellent text book on the subject of what is happening to modern families.

An interdisciplinary collection of current and classical readings, Family in Transition guides students' exploration of the many transformations taking place in families today. Throughout, Arlene and Jerome Skolnick demonstrate their extraordinary talent for selecting readings that capture the latest on both the changes in the family itself and and in the study of families. Introductions to each chapter showcase major issues and topical conundrums, encouraging students to think critically about the material. This ninth edition introduces a new chapter on family diversity with unique readings African-American, Hispanic, and lesbian and gay families. Fourteen new selections point out the many changes in family culture, structure, behavior, and economics.

This 14th edition of a classic text in family studies provides an excellent look at family styles in the early 21st century. Although the bulk of the book is North American in content and origin, there is useful material here from other cultural perspectives.

Especially helpful is the section on parenting (section 7) which includes a careful study of current trends in adoption. Within the U.S., individual states are changing public policy in ways that benefit families who include non-birth children within their household. Recent U.S. federal policy also encourages this process.

Another useful section reviews "work and family life." (section 9) Here is one of the best sociological studies of the way our current economy impacts family roles, structures, and outcomes. More study is needed here; this is a topic well worth exploring.

Overall, the 14th edition continues to build on an excellent platform that Jerome and Arlene Skolnick have provided and edited.

Dr. David Frisbie
The Center for Marriage & Family Studies
Author of: Moving Forward After Divorce: Practical Steps to * Healing Your Hurts * Finding Fresh Perspective * Managing Your New Life