two more rare Sorokin photos

 

Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin, Harvard Crimson, September 28 1933
Pitirim Sorokin, California Daily Bruin, UCLA, July 2, 1937

a damaging review of two Sorokin works

 

Ruth Benedict review of The Crisis of Our Age & Dynamics – New Republic 2-2-1942

 

Posted here is a review by Ruth Benedict of Sorokin’s The Crisis of Our Age and of his Social and Cultural Dynamics in The New Republic of February 2, 1942.

The review identifies and nails some of Sorokin’s fundamental weaknesses as a scholar. But, in my opinion (I would be inclined to say, that is), Sorokin does not fit neatly into any scholarly paradigm. He came out of a Russian tradition which was more mystical (is that the right word?) — certainly — than was or is seen in the social sciences; and he was never really understood or accepted by American intellectuals.

 

*****************************************************

Ruth Benedict (1887-1948) was an American anthropologist and folklorist. She taught at Columbia University, where she did graduate work under the anthropologist Franz Boas. Patterns of Culture was her best known work.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

      July 2021

Please note repost: Henry Noble MacCracken, “Russia of To-day”

 

I have reposted

at

Henry Noble MacCracken, “Russia of To-day”

 

“Russia of To-day”

by Henry Noble MacCracken

review of

современное состояние России (sovremennoye sostoyaniye Rossii; The

Present State of Russia)

By Pitirim Sorokin

Prague, 1922

 

I had previously posted the wrong document; and the full text of this very illuminating and hard to find article was not available.

Henry Noble MacCracken was the President of Vassar College.

 

— Roger W. Smith

3 more rare (as far as I know) photos of Sorokin

 

Boston Daily Record, October 6, 1937
undated photo of Sorokin
Harvard Research Center in Creative Altruism, 1955

 

posted by Roger W. Smith

a Sorokin essay (1962)

 

Sorokin, ‘Theses on the Role of Historical Method in the Social Sciences’

 

Posted here (PDF file above) is

Pitirim A. Sorokin

Theses on the Role of Historical Method in the Social Sciences

address delivered at the Fifth World Congress of Sociology, Washington, DC, 1962

 

This essay does seem to be not readily available.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

May 2021

a rare Sorokin photo

 

 

Sorokin and family, presumably in Winchester, Massachusetts, 1930s

I have not seen this photo before.

 

posted by Roger W. Smith

     May 2021

Sorokin, “Russian Religion: Its Evolution Through Revolution”

 

Sorokin, ‘Russian Religion; Its Evolution Through Revolution’ – Religion in Life, Winter 1943-44

 

Posted here (PDF file above) is the following article:

Pitirim A. Sorokin, “Russian Religion: Its Evolution Through Revolution”

Religion in Life: A Christian Quarterly

Vol XIII, No. 1

Winter 1943-44

pp. 3-17

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

    May 2021

Sorokin “is out” (was, here; twenty years ago)

 

Gehard Falk, ‘Tenure allows hest professors to succeed’ – Buffalo News 2-12-1999

 

Gerhard Falk

Tenure allows best professors to succeed without resentment   (editorial)

The Buffalo News

February 12, 1999

pg. B2

 

Academic tenure permits a professor or teacher to hold his job until retirement or for life. This arrangement has come under considerable criticism in recent months on the grounds that it tends to protect incompetent faculty from losing their jobs.

While this criticism is sometimes valid, it overlooks that tenure protects the best and most productive faculty from resentment against achievement. …

[T]he best work done in any university or college is done by tenured, full professors who are free to publish, teach and produce without worrying about the committee professionals and other self-appointed elitists who dominate almost every campus. Today, almost the entire academic establishment is dominated by those who demand conformity at any price. In fact, rigid conformity and puritanical thinking are the principal characteristics of the academic world, so that there is hardly any room for individualism anywhere in our institutions of higher learning. Those who express views not to the liking of campus politicians are either deprived of their jobs, denied promotions or excluded from faculty activities.

Aa a result, large numbers of faculty no longer attend any meetings, refuse to serve on committees for fear teaching [sic] subject matter not “politically correct.” That phrase refers to the belief that some thoughts should not be expressed, some ideas not exhibited, some books not written and some forms of expression not spoken. “Political correctness” is just one form of tyranny among the many that have plagued mankind. It is, however, most egregious that the academy is now “goose stepping” to the campus “thought police.”

For example, it is currently almost impossible for a graduate student in psychology to follow teachings of Sigmund Freud. Freud is “politically incorrect.” Similarly, a graduate student in sociology would not dare express an interest in the work of Pitirim Sorokin. He, too, is out. …

 

*****************************************************

 

Of course, while Sorokin may not have hated Freud personally, he had no use for Freud’s theories.

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

     March 2021

Natalia S. Sergieva and Roger W. Smith, “Special considerations in translating Pitirim Sorokin’s work “City and country” (Prague, 1923)

 

‘Special Considerations in Translating Pitirim Sorokin’s Work’

‘Special Considerations in Translating Pitirim Sorokin’s Work’

Downloadable documents above.

 

Special considerations in translating Pitirim Sorokin’s work “City and country” (Prague, 1923)

By Natalia  S. Sergieva and Roger W. Smith

филологические науки

Международный научный журнал

№ 6 Часть 2

Ноябрь 2020

(Philological Sciences, International Scientific Journal, No. 6, Part 2, November 2020)

pp.  227-232

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

     December 2020

Sorokin on the city versus the country

 

мы знаем, что характер поведения людей (А) представляет результат («функцию») двух основных причин, двух «независимых переменных»: характера организма со всеми его наследственно полученными свойствами (В) и характера среды, как комплекса раздражителей (С), воздействующих на организм и вызывающих с его стороны ответные акты («реакции»), в своей совокупности и составляющие поведение.

A = f (B+C)

Если поэтому в этом уравнении меняется организм (В) или сфера (С) или обе «независимые, переменные», то меняется и поведение (А). Среда (С) города и среда деревни глубоко отличны друг от друга, а в силу различия этой «переменной», резко различным будет и поведение (с психикой) горожанина и земледельца. Первый живет главным образом «на лоне культуры», второй — «на лоне природы». Первый находится в среде «искусcтвенной», второй ‒ «естественной». Железо, бетон и камни, пар и электричество, огромная скученность населения, магазины, кафе, газеты, телефон, фабрики, машины, беспрерывно движущийся поток трамваев, автомобилей, и поездов, сумасшедшая толкотня и суетня на улицах, ‒ такова среда горожанина. Весь мир он воспринимает сквозь призму «культуры», сам он, так сказать, весь обернут газетами и пеленками «цивилизации» и только изредка подвергается прямому воздействию «природы». Не естественный ветер обдувает его, а струя вентиляционного воздуха, настоящее солнце ему заменяет электрическая люстра, почву ‒ мостовая, реку ‒ сжатый в железо и бетон, испачканный нефтью канал, лес и деревья ‒ подстриженный и напудренно-вылощенный сквер, чудеса и жизнь природы он видит лишь в «кино», жизнь животных ‒ в «зоологическом саду». Сам он весь «стилизован» и «окультурен», начиная с вставных зубов, пудры, корсета, и кончая … нефтью, машинным маслом и копотью угля …

 

*****************************************************

 

We know that the behavior of people (A) represents the result (“function”) of two main causes, two “independent variables”: the nature of the organism with all of its hereditarily obtained properties (B) and the nature of the environment, as a complex of stimuli (C), acting upon the body and causing on its part reciprocal acts (“reactions”), in their totality and composite behavior.

A = f (B + C)

If therefore in this equation the organism (B) or the sphere (C) or both “independent variables” change, then the behavior also changes (A). The environment (C) of a city and the environment of a village are profoundly different from one another, and due to the difference in this “variable,” the behavior (as well as the psyche) of a city dweller and a farmer will also be distinctly different. The first lives mainly “in the bosom of culture,” the second ‒ “in the bosom of nature.” The first is in an “artificial,” the second ‒ in a “natural” environment. Iron, concrete and stones, steam and electricity, a huge overcrowding of the population, shops, cafes, newspapers, telephones, factories, cars, a constantly moving stream of trams, cars and trains, the crazy hustle and bustle in the streets ‒ this is the environment of a city dweller. He perceives the whole world through the prism of “culture,” he himself, so to speak, is all wrapped up in newspapers and diapers of “civilization” and is only occasionally exposed to the direct influence of “nature.” It is not a natural wind that blows it, but a stream of ventilated air, the real sun is replaced by an electric chandelier, the soil is pavement, a river is compressed into iron and concrete, a canal stained with oil, a forest and trees are a trimmed and powdered and polished park, the wonders and the life of nature he sees only in the “cinema,” the life of animals ‒ in a “zoological garden.” He himself is all “stylized” and “cultured,” starting with false teeth, powder, a corset, and ending … with oil, engine oil and coal soot …

— excerpted from Pitirim Sorokin, “Город и Деревня. (био-социологическая характеристика)” (“City and Country. (Bio-Sociological Characteristics”); Prague: Peasant Russia Publishing House, 1923); English translation by Natalia S. Sergieva and Roger W. Smith

 

— posted by Roger W. Smith

      October 2020