This thread turned out better than I expected. I guess one of the central issues is the idea of objectivity, which I believe is quite irrelevant given the high degree of subjectivity that one finds in the methodological approaches, data interpretation, and theoretical frameworks of many of the so called “quantitative-based professional sociologists”. However, I, in no way, wanted to suggest that professional sociology ought to be completely removed from consideration. There is a definite need to engage with the academic community in attempting to improve and expand on previous approaches and paradigms. My critique is of the sociologists who simply believe that the ‘means’ of sociological investigation ought to be the only factors of consideration. I personally believe any sociologist ought to incorporate all four aspects of sociological thinking: professional, critical, public, and policy. This academic, institutionalized form of sociological thinking that overemphasizes ivory tower methodology and public detachment is contrary, in my opinion, to the fundamental essence of sociology as a discipline, an essence that is characterized by a scientific concern for ‘means’ but a humanistic concern for ‘ends’. We, as sociologists, cannot be removed from the society we hope to understand and help. Part of that obligation means incorporating reflexive, critical sociological techniques and accessible, public-oriented forms of sociological engagement.