[MWS 11.2 (2011) 289-291] ISSN 1470-8078 Book Review Uta Gerhardt, Soziologie im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert. Studien zu ihrer Geschichte in Deutschland (Stuttgart: Franz SteinerVerlag, 2009), 392pp. ISBN 978-3-515-09286 9. €42.00. This book is an impressive Fundgrube. It offers an account of key episodes over six periods, accounted for in six chronologically ordered chapters. Germany has experienced six different forms of rule and legitimacy during the 20th century and Gerhardt's work demonstrates how history of sociology should be a contextual endeavour, with sociology related to society. The perspective is 'anti-positivist' (anti-Social-Darwinist/anti-unified science). According to Gerhardt neo-Kantianism has eroded sociology, and she re-constructs a line manifested in Dilthey, Simmel, Max Weber, Schütz and Parsons. German sociology post-1945 is partly an American re-import. Ideas were carried over the Atlantic Ocean and re-contextualized, and they also shaped intellectual development on the European continent. Many social policy problems appeared earlier in the US than in Europe, only to mention such sociological research areas as segregation, lobbying, and ethnic tension. The large scale survey-tradition was developed in the USA. Gerhardt is an eminent expert on Talcott Parsons, who influenced not only Euro pean sociology but also the democratization in Germany after World War Two. Par sons gained his PhD degree from Heidelberg in the 1920s. Max Weber's world wide success is thanks to the American reception of his work. Yet the legacy of Weber is problematic. Without Parsons's wishful extension of Weber to the level of a macro-theoretician Weber might have remained another dead European intellectual. At the Heidelberg Centennial in 1964 Adorno, well known for his vehement anti-Weber feelings, and others had planned an assault on Weber's legacy. Habermas and Marcuse did their best to denounce Weber's 'techni cal reason' and to use the link to Carl Schmitt as a sort of guilt by association, even implying co-responsibility for atrocities during the NS-period. Parsons and Rein hard Bendix managed to intervene in the staging of the program, and foreign schol ars such as Parsons himself, Benjamin Nelson and Raymond Aron gave the event as a whole a more 'pluralistic' and international feel. As a controversy, though, it firmly placed Weber on the scene. Even Weber's most vehement critics manifest ambiguity, as was the case with the earlier case of Weber's sometime pupil György Lukâcs, whose Geschichte und Klas senbeumsstsein (1923) is a synthesis of Weber and Marx, anticipating the Frankfurt School—a point made by Reinhard Bendix who was a non-Frankfurt migrant. Nelson in a famous letter to the editor of the New York Times Book Review on 3 January 1965 commented upon the Heidelberg centennial, that there 'took place a© Max Weber Studies 2011, Clifton House, 17 Malvern Road, London, E8 3LP. 290 Max Weber Studies scapegoating of Weber by a highly vocal faction cratic, anti-Nazis, committed to the so-called "cri neo-Marxist) philosophy'". Further: the 'Titan o as a main inspiration of the "Hitler event of 1933 hardt, p. 268). Marcuse even implied Weber's views on 'formal for the 'final solution', which is explicit in Stamm (in the longer complete version, not in the abridg cal meeting). The Frankfurt school had its diaspora—but many migrants also returned to Europe. After World War Two German sociology was restarted, in Cologne and other places. Reconciliation between a critical hermeneutic tradition and new empir ical US-inspired research also became an issue. Gerhardt claims that there was no scientific sociology in Germany during the National Socialist period, a claim some might think is an exaggeration. During the National Socialist regime in Germany some sociologists accommodated and became 'Brot-Nazis', as in the case of Gerhard Mackenroth. Sociology was rather vegeta tive, although some activities went on, in particular in Leipzig. The legacy of the 'Leipziger Schule' cannot be neglected (and to see this fleshed out compare the works by Earl Eubank and Elfriede Oner). Leipzig had an ambience long imprinted by 'positivism', and was far more than common in Germany, possibly because of a British links to the Saxony dynasts...
Read full abstract