Jump to content

Sociology and Anthropology


brandnewshoes

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone! I am a supremely long time lurker, and thought I would finally say something to distract from the incessant refreshing of the results page. I'm primarily applying to anthropology departments, but have applied to two sociology departments - one of which I've been accepted to (Minnesota). As I'm an international student and have only studied sociology in my country (where it's a combination of traditional sociology and anthropology), I'm curious about the major differences in the two disciplines in the US. Can any broad differences be generalized, or does it just come down to departments and theoretical/methodological leanings? My research interests have to do with political economy in South Asia, so I found myself able to slot into both disciplines, but am curious as to broader differences in coursework, and a post-PhD job market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm well I think my impression has always been that in the US, soc and anthro have different intellectual lineages, methodologies, and particular histories. soc in the us tends to be more conservative theoretically and politically and to utilize quantitative, demography and statistical analyses far more frequently than anthro or sociology in other countries. anthro in the us tends to be pretty up straight qualitative and ethnographic.

 

one thing that ive noticed is the difference in how scholars and students describe their interests between anthro and soc. sociologists tend to list their sub-disciplinary allegiances e.g. "medical sociology, sociology of the body, critical race studies" where as anthropologists tend to list things like "subjectivities, politics of representation, US, Latin America" or one particular aspect of something- which falls under a subdiscipline of anthro but gets presented differently. Soc in the US is often preoccupied with policing the boundaries of subdisciplines and what counts as sociological knowledge. Largely because sociology doubled down on being scientistic because of institutional crises and works hard to pass as legitimate above all else, to the detriment, I would argue, of interesting, critical scholarship.

 

abroad, at least in europe, sociology has far stronger ties to things such as critical theory (for lack of better term), cultural studies, media studies, etc and I think theres a lot more resonance with anthro as a result. not that theres not room for these things in the US but its a matter of finding good pockets in which to do this.

 

you shouldnt really have a problem doing political economic work on South Asia, I shouldnt think. You might have to dance at certain points to make things "count" (often literally) but you should be fine. Can't speak to UMinn in particular tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, cheff! That does make the distinction a bit more clear, though apart from some broader theoretical divisions in lineage, I suppose interdisciplinary work in either discipline includes techniques and theories of the other? Again, I'm hoping this flexibility is up to the independent scholar in either department. The sociology I learnt was, perhaps, far more qualitative/ethnographic than sociology in the US perhaps tends to be. How about post-PhD job options for either discipline? Would appreciate any thoughts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only caveat to what Cheff already aptly stated, but the division is also marked by philosophical underpinnings and theoretical positions.  Essentially, once the cultural turn began to swing at the close of functionalism and structuralism, it opened up for a broader division between the disciplines.  As Cheff said, soc doubled down on reductionist (empiricist) philosophical underpinnings in an attempt to turn social science more into a psuedo science (rather than the general European idea of science as the organized knowledge of a subject).  Following the cultural turn within soc, this led to interpretivist (hermeneutic) modes of inquiry most prominently featured in Cultural Sociology and more open-ended post-modern and post structuralist modes of inquiry in Cultural Anthropology.  Ethnography can be (and is) implemented in both, but its really about the mode of analysis and explication of meaning, and of course, upon what are they brought to bear: the structure, the population, or the agency.

 

As far as jobs, that's really how you mesh your mode with your interests to create the most broad you that you can.  I'll say that culture and comparative are pretty down in the chips as far as the job markets are concerned right now.  This is largely due to the fact that everyone 'does culture' in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much Coindinista, that's an extremely useful response! I'm going to visit one of the Sociology Departments towards the end of the month and try and figure out what works better in terms of the kind of work I hope to do. It is interesting to trace the evolution of the two disciplines across countries and curriculums though, particularly in terms of their origins, and how they've grown past them to study the native/self/other/in-between.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use