Human Ecology and Social Theory

Abstract

ABOUT two years ago there api-I Fpeared a volume of some Z50 ~~pages entitled Social Ecology by Milla A. Alihan. I Although the book was a devastating criticism of sociological theory it apparently attracted little attention and provoked no great amount of discussion. This lack of interest may be attributed in large measure to the fact that the book deals specifically with human or social ecology, a theoretical system that, developed during the last twenty years or so, has been confined to a rather small group of scholars, and has produced no published work to speak of beyond numerous scattered articles in the journals, occasional papers read at the meetings of the American Sociological Society, and somewhat incidental treatment in a few introductory text-books in sociology. Despite this general lack of attention, Alihan's opening sentence in her Introduction reads: The ecological school is one of the most definite and influential schools in American Sociology at the present time. Whether or not such a statement exaggerates the importance of human or social ecology may be left to others and the future to decide. It is sufficient to point out that, as a theoretical system and a research method, human ecology is deserving of more attention than it has yet received and that a critical appraisal of and strictures against its basic hypotheses, conceptual structure, and fundamental conclusions, such as Dr. Alihan has written, can not be passed lightly by. It may be said, in passing, that Dr. Alihan has performed a meritorious service in the interest of social science research methods and the formulation of logical and valid social theory. While her critique of the ecological school is almost entirely negative, it is not malicious. To point out mistakes is not to correct them to be sure, and to examine is not to explain. Nevertheless, a fair, unbiased criticism, supported by copious documentation, may serve to stimulate the scientists, in this case the social ecologists, to reexamine their theoretical framework and to give it a more careful statement. Likewise, scholars in other schools of social thought may be aroused to the crying need for a more continuous investigation of theories, refinempnt of concepts, and scrutiny of research methods growing out of repeated tests of their adequacy and validity. If Dr. Alihan succeeds in some measure in accomplishing this end, she * Read at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Society in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, December 29, I939. 1 Published by Columbia University Press, New York, I938.