Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World

the book was in good condition --- just like described --- recieved book in 2-3 days after ordering --- i would recommend this seller to everyone ---- i have dealt with them several times and they have always delivered as promised

Allan's book is clearly written, contains instructive figures which help to clarify important points made in the text, and it does not trivialize difficult concepts. The tabular explanation of the labor theory of value is especially well done. Allan acknowledges the contributions of typically overlooked African-American and female theorists. While this is interesting and informative, it also contributes to the list-like character of the book, and militates against synthesis and development of applications to contemporary issues and historically important events. Too many of Allan's examples, moreover, are taken from his everyday personal life, especially as that overlaps with the lives of his students. In principle there is nothing wrong with this, and it is consistent with Allan's interest in the work of Alfred Schutz. However, the examples he chooses seem, for the most part, to be practically and theoretically inconsequential. Allan's interpretations of Durkheim and Mead are a bit misleading. Yes, Durkheim paid greater attention to religion and its relationship to morality in his later work. In deference to that, however, Allan gives short-shrift to the brilliant and currently quite applicable insights that provided the bases for The Division of Labor in Society and Suicide. In the process, he gives too much attention to relatively unimportant ideas and to concepts of dubious merit such as "collective effervescence," which Durkheim used only in an off-handed way. I think that the reader leaves Allan's account of Dukheim with a distorted notion as to which of his ideas have proved to be really important and useful. Though most of Allan's book is well written, Mead's work is presented much less clearly than it might be. I agree that Mead is difficult to read and even harder to clarify for others. Nevertheless, having read Allan's account, I suspect that, without prior knowledge, I would have been quite confused and would have been left wondering why Mead was of theoretical interest.

This is an excellent, in-depth, and readable book, ideal for upper level undergraduate classes in social theory. Allan explains the significance of domain assumptions in sociological theory and provides a thorough treatment of each theorist. I would have given the book five stars if it had included a chapter on Mannheim or the Frankfurt School.