Robert Leroux – författare

This book explores the shift in sociology away from the shared aspiration of the classical transition, of transcending partiality through the construction of a "science of society", in the face of challenges to the notion of objectivity.

With the increasing subjugation of sociology to political ideologies and a growing emphasis on "policy", which casts sociology in the role of a provider of intellectual content for political programs, this volume asks whether the situation is the result of an exhaustion of ideas or might perhaps be rooted in the failure in the very program of establishing sociology as a science. Taking seriously the challenges to the classical aspiration of constructing theories that both explain and are grounded in empirical reality, The Future of Sociology asks whether the core idea of transcending ideology is still worth pursuing, and whether there remains scope for making sociology scientific.

As such, it will appeal to scholars and students of sociology, social theory, and social scientific methodology.

This book explores the shift in sociology away from the shared aspiration of the classical transition, of transcending partiality through the construction of a "science of society", in the face of challenges to the notion of objectivity.

With the increasing subjugation of sociology to political ideologies and a growing emphasis on "policy", which casts sociology in the role of a provider of intellectual content for political programs, this volume asks whether the situation is the result of an exhaustion of ideas or might perhaps be rooted in the failure in the very program of establishing sociology as a science. Taking seriously the challenges to the classical aspiration of constructing theories that both explain and are grounded in empirical reality, The Future of Sociology asks whether the core idea of transcending ideology is still worth pursuing, and whether there remains scope for making sociology scientific.

As such, it will appeal to scholars and students of sociology, social theory, and social scientific methodology.

Political and economic liberalism has generally been considered to be of marginal import in France, but at an intellectual level, it is a different story. An exploration of the history of French economic thought shows how a rich intellectual tradition developed during the nineteenth century, which has been previously neglected in English language studies of French thinking. In this important new collection, Robert Leroux brings together key works, both from widely regarded and lesser known authors, whose thinking constituted the core of a singular intellectual movement. These include such figures as Charles Dunoyer, Joseph Garnier, Gustave de Molinari, Yves Guyot, Alexis de Tocqueville, Benjamin Constant and Frédéric Bastiat.

Including several works that have never before been published in English, this anthology begins with a full introduction that provides an overview of liberal thought in the nineteenth century, and each text is preceded by a biographical note on the author, and an explanation of the wider significance of the text. This anthology, by bringing to the fore a number of writers and doctrinal positions, seeks to give a coherence, an overall cast to French liberalism without exaggerating its unity. It will be of interest to economists, political scientists, historians, philosophers and sociologists alike.

Political and economic liberalism has generally been considered to be of marginal import in France, but at an intellectual level, it is a different story. An exploration of the history of French economic thought shows how a rich intellectual tradition developed during the nineteenth century, which has been previously neglected in English language studies of French thinking. In this important new collection, Robert Leroux brings together key works, both from widely regarded and lesser known authors, whose thinking constituted the core of a singular intellectual movement. These include such figures as Charles Dunoyer, Joseph Garnier, Gustave de Molinari, Yves Guyot, Alexis de Tocqueville, Benjamin Constant and Frédéric Bastiat.

Including several works that have never before been published in English, this anthology begins with a full introduction that provides an overview of liberal thought in the nineteenth century, and each text is preceded by a biographical note on the author, and an explanation of the wider significance of the text. This anthology, by bringing to the fore a number of writers and doctrinal positions, seeks to give a coherence, an overall cast to French liberalism without exaggerating its unity. It will be of interest to economists, political scientists, historians, philosophers and sociologists alike.

In the late 19th century and early part of the 20th, with the coming of age of sociology in France, the idea that there could be a “science” of history was the subject of much and varied debate. The methodological problems surrounding historical knowledge that were debated throughout this period concerned not only scientific history, but the social sciences as well, and sociology more specifically.

Although sociology was from its origins in competition with the discipline of history, from the outset, it too was interested in history as a form of objective knowledge. Many of sociology''s founders believed that by retracing historical processes, they could make a clean break with abstraction and metaphysics. For their part, historians generally remained hostile to any kind of systematization. And yet, at the end of the 19th century, the science of history would draw some valuable lessons from the emerging methodology of sociology. It was in large part under the impetus of the issues and problems raised by the philosopher Henri Berr and by the Durkheimian School, with the economist François Simiand as its lead protagonist, that the community of historians, increasingly aware of the limits of narrative history, turned so enthusiastically to social and economic history – just as Durkheim and his disciples consulted history in order to avoid the twin pitfalls of the philosophy of history and of introspective psychology. History and Sociology in France focuses on this dialogue of the two neighboring sciences.

In the late 19th century and early part of the 20th, with the coming of age of sociology in France, the idea that there could be a “science” of history was the subject of much and varied debate. The methodological problems surrounding historical knowledge that were debated throughout this period concerned not only scientific history, but the social sciences as well, and sociology more specifically.

Although sociology was from its origins in competition with the discipline of history, from the outset, it too was interested in history as a form of objective knowledge. Many of sociology''s founders believed that by retracing historical processes, they could make a clean break with abstraction and metaphysics. For their part, historians generally remained hostile to any kind of systematization. And yet, at the end of the 19th century, the science of history would draw some valuable lessons from the emerging methodology of sociology. It was in large part under the impetus of the issues and problems raised by the philosopher Henri Berr and by the Durkheimian School, with the economist François Simiand as its lead protagonist, that the community of historians, increasingly aware of the limits of narrative history, turned so enthusiastically to social and economic history – just as Durkheim and his disciples consulted history in order to avoid the twin pitfalls of the philosophy of history and of introspective psychology. History and Sociology in France focuses on this dialogue of the two neighboring sciences.

This book seeks to identify the main threads of a resolutely complex course of thought which has contributed greatly to sociology. Although he founded no “school,” Raymond Boudon certainly made original contributions to the discipline in his own time, including his theory of rationality, his interpretation of the work of the founders of sociology, and his explanation of educational inequalities. He also presented convincing arguments about how the overly narrow utilitarianism of mainstream economists was incomplete and betrayed major theoretical gaps. It is true in any case that his thought laid the groundwork for many theoretical and empirical social studies. Through an analysis of the most important parts of this thought, each of the chapters will not merely demonstrate the scientific rigor which can be associated to his work, but also show how it remains relevant to our understanding of contemporary society and how it can hence be used for future research projects.

There can be no doubt, Boudon’s thought has for various reasons undergone new assessments. Chapters of this book hence reflect a variety of points of view on how his work can be understood, criticized, and used for future research endeavors. 

This book seeks to identify the main threads of a resolutely complex course of thought which has contributed greatly to sociology. Although he founded no “school,” Raymond Boudon certainly made original contributions to the discipline in his own time, including his theory of rationality, his interpretation of the work of the founders of sociology, and his explanation of educational inequalities. He also presented convincing arguments about how the overly narrow utilitarianism of mainstream economists was incomplete and betrayed major theoretical gaps. It is true in any case that his thought laid the groundwork for many theoretical and empirical social studies. Through an analysis of the most important parts of this thought, each of the chapters will not merely demonstrate the scientific rigor which can be associated to his work, but also show how it remains relevant to our understanding of contemporary society and how it can hence be used for future research projects.

There can be no doubt, Boudon’s thought has for various reasons undergone new assessments. Chapters of this book hence reflect a variety of points of view on how his work can be understood, criticized, and used for future research endeavors. 

L’œuvre de Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850) a été, dès le milieu du dix-neuvième siècle, l’objet de multiples malentendus et d’interprétations contradictoires. D’un côté, on l’a souvent réduite à sa dimension polémique, à son style engagé ou encore à quelques formes chocs ; de l’autre, on a parfois souligné la portée cognitive de ses thèses en dégageant notamment leur influence sur la science économique moderne. Cet ouvrage, dont le propos est de restituer la cohérence et l’unité d’une pensée en apparence éparse, insiste sur la double contribution de Bastiat à la fois à l’essor de la science sociale et au développement du libéralisme. Robert Leroux enseigne la sociologie à la Faculté des Sciences sociales de l’Université d’Ottawa.

Dès ses débuts, la doctrine de l’industrialisme a mobilisé des auteurs de diverses tendances. Bien sûr, le nom de Saint-Simon y a souvent été étroitement associé, mais il ne faut pas oublier qu’il ne représente que le versant socialiste; celui qui relève du libéralisme a été, quant à lui, pratiquement occulté. Ce livre se propose de combler cette lacune. Il insiste sur le fait que la première génération de libéraux français du xixe siècle (J.-B. Say, Constant, Droz, etc.) a fourni des éléments cruciaux qui permettront quelques années plus tard à deux inséparables amis, Charles Comte et Charles Dunoyer, de définir l’industrialisme dans une forme plus achevée qui s’oppose radicalement, sous plusieurs aspects, au saint-simonisme. Preuve que le terme « industrialisme » est extrêmement polysémique. Le machinisme, la production de la richesse, l’ère des métiers et de la spécialisation, l’irréductibilité du progrès, la question de la liberté et de l’individualisme : tels sont, en bref, les principaux thèmes que l’on trouve sous la plume des industrialistes d’inspiration libérale. Mais chez Comte et Dunoyer, l’industrialisme apparaît comme une sorte de philosophie de l’histoire dont le but est d’identifier les étapes sinueuses de l’idée de liberté. Ce faisant, ils partent d’un constat, voire d’une inquiétude : la liberté est fragile et n’est jamais, somme toute, acquise définitivement.