ASOC 26A00 - Global sociological debates: Latin American perspectives

As the main advanced course in sociology and anthropology that can be taken during the second year of undergraduate studies at all Sciences Po campuses, Global Sociological Debates is a continuation of Introduction to Sociology, as well as an important complement to the other - more descriptive, methodological and hands-on classes - which are mandatory in the Economy and Society major.

This class is open to students from all three majors and will familiarize them with some of the main contemporary social scientific debates currently going on. It will achieve this through the presentation of several theoretical and analytical paradigms, as well as the study of their development, operationalization and consolidation through empirical research in Asia. The course will focus on major issues, selected for both their social and political relevance and their sociological complexity, including the multilevel tension between micro-, meso- and macro- explanations.

It will also develop an international comparative perspective, showing how each of the issues addressed are structured and discussed in national- and regional-specific ways. Therefore, this will also be an introduction to how sociology and anthropology are practiced and written in Asia, with its distinct scientific and intellectual traditions, and to the complementarity between the transnational character of the main debates and how they are conjugated and renewed in particular contexts.

Descriptif des séances

Week 1

Sociology from a Latin American perspective: contemporary debates.

The class introduces students to Latin American sociological studies today, always starting from its most sensitive contemporary debates. New studies on class, race and ethnicity, postcolonialism, nation, diaspora, violence, gender and sexuality, as well as themes linked to urbanization, migration, family and environmental issues are all part of the contemporary sociological discussion. We see how these themes remain similar to those of the foundational approaches, but now in new configurations.

Mandatory readings for the students:

-Portes, Alejandro, and William Canak. “Latin America: Social Structures and Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 7, 1981, pp. 225–48. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946029

-Fischer, Brodwyn, Bryan McCann, and Javier Auyero (eds.). Cities from Scratch. Poverty and Informality in Urban Latin America. North Carolina: Duke University Press, 2014. 304 p. (Introduction)

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

-Fischer, B., & Grinberg, K. (Eds.). (2022). The Boundaries of Freedom: Slavery, Abolition, and the Making of Modern Brazil. Cambridge University Press.

Week 2

The debate about race I - What is the sociological view on race? What is the difference between race and ethnicity? Does it mean the same thing in the U.S., in France and in Latin America? What is the link between race and nation? What does it mean to think of racial differences as socially-constructed? Does it mean that they are never biological? How does the historical and social construction of racial differences vary in different contexts? Can we speak of racism when people do not “see” race? Does unconscious racism exist, and how do sociologists know if it does? What’s structural racism? And what about caste?

Mandatory readings for the students:

W.E.B. Du Bois. The Philadelphia Negro. Essay, 1899.

Hall, S. 2019. Identity and diaspora. Essential essays, v.2. Duke University Press.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Wade, P. (2014). Race in Latin America. In The companion to Latin American studies (pp. 185-199). Routledge.

Week 3

The debate about race II - Capitalism and racism are intertwined, but are they necessarily intertwined? Do we need to understand racialization to understand inequality? In other words, could capitalism exist without racism? And conversely, could racism in its modern form exist without capitalism? Does sociology need racialized scholars to be fully able to study racialization? Should individuals have the right to claim whatever racial identity they prefer?

Mandatory readings for the students:

Clastres, P. De l'Ethnocide. L'Homme , Jul. - Dec., 1974, T. 14, No. 3/4 (Jul. - Dec., 1974), pp. 101-110. Schwarz, B., & Hall, S. (2017). Familiar Stranger: A Life between Two Islands.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Martins Jr, A. (2020). Moving Difference: Brazilians in London. Routledge.

Feltran, G. (2018). Category as interval: the difference in between essence and deconstruction. Cadernos Pagu.

Week 4

The debate about religion and religion I - Are we living in a particularly “materialistic” age? Does sociology claim for an emancipation from religious beliefs, values and practices? Are all major religions religious fields? The session will be dedicated to discussing three major contemporary debates: religion and science; religion and politics; religion and violence.

Mandatory readings for the students:

• Durkheim, Émile (1995). The elementary forms of religious life. New York : Free Press (Please read Introduction and Conclusion).
• Olson, L. R., Cadge, W., & Harrison, J. T. (2006). Religion and public opinion about same‐sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 340-360.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Wach, J. (2019). Sociology of religion. Routledge.

Clastres, H. (1987). Religion without gods: The sixteenth century chroniclers and the South American savages. History and Anthropology, 3(1), 61-82.

Week 5

The debate about religion and religion II - Why do so many religions oppose gender studies? Why do so many religions have rules about the sexuality of their followers, and in particular of women? Is there a theology of material prosperity? Are there religions without traditional religious values? Is the public debate about climate change first and foremost a cosmological debate? The session will be dedicated to discussing

other three major contemporary debates: religious and gender; religion and economics (including illegal markets); “alternative” sects and religions.

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Weber, Max. ‘The Economic Ethic of the World Religions’ and ‘Intermediate Considerations: Theory of Stages and Directions of Religious Rejections of the world’, 1915, From Max Weber, ed. H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills.

Iannaccone, Larry. "Introduction to the Economics of Religion" Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.

36, No. 3 (1998), pp. 1465-1495.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Almeida, R. Le pentecôtisme brésilien: expansion, variation et invention. Brésil(S) - Sciences Humaines et Sociales, v. 9, p. 1-24, 2016

Almeida, R. The broken wave: Evangelicals and conservatism in the Brazilian crisis. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2020 10:1, 32-40

Week 6

The fair society debate - How do sociologists think about what makes a good life (hedonism versus eudaimonism), a desirable society (development versus wellbeing) and a fair society? How can sociology help us understand if a “fair society” can be unequal (and how much) and/or authoritarian? Can we empirically determine “acceptable” levels of inequality? Are inequalities easily accepted when there is more social mobility? Are inequalities easily accepted when there is more social integration (and therefore less social segregation), or is it actually the opposite? How does sociology address the historical opposition between capitalism and

socialism? How to describe and analyze the different “worlds” of welfare capitalism? Should we analyze poverty in terms of (lack of) individual assets and capitals, or through a relational approach? What is meritocracy and how to study it? How does the postcolonial perspective reshape the debate about social and economic fairness? How does the intersectional perspective do it? Can we only achieve fairness through reparations?

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Marshall, G. and Swift, A. (1993). Social class and social justice. British Journal of Sociology, 44, 187– 211.

Gøsta Esping-Andersen. 1989. “The three political economies of the welfare state” Canadian Review of Sociology 26(1): 10-36.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Bizberg, I. (2024). Four Worlds of Latin American Welfare States. In Four Worlds of the Welfare State in Latin America (pp. 23-50). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Week 7

The debate about love I - How does sociology study emotions? Are desire and love social constructs or biological phenomena? Are some emotions more “basic” than others? Can love be disinterested? How can we explain the propensity towards homogamy? Have we ever been romantic? Has the rise of capitalism created an unemotional world dominated by rationality and calculation? Why in some countries are there norms of age differences within herosexual couples?

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Eduardo Bericat. 2016. “The sociology of emotions” Current Sociology 64(3): 491-513.

Eva Illouz. 2007. “Suffering, emotional fields, and emotional capital” Pp. 40-73 in Cold Intimacies: The Making of Emotional Capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Anderson, N. (2023). The Hobo: the sociology of the homeless man. DigiCat. (chapter “The sexual life”) Costa, S. (2005). Easy Loving: romanticism and consumerism in late modernity. Novos Estudos- CEBRAP, 1(SE), 0-0.

Week 8

The debate about love II - Are all couple relations somehow economico-sexual exchanges? Is there something as erotic capital? Does pornography change(d) romantic relationships? Can love be used to justify domination, exploitation and/or violence? Is feminism compatible with romantic love? What is the relation between love and care? How can sociology analyze the difference between love for a partner and love for one’s parents, children or friends? What does it mean to love god? How can some people feel the love of god?

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Luc Boltanski. 2012 (1st French ed.: 1990). “Agape: An Introduction to the States of Peace” Pp. 89-168 in Love and Justice as Competences: Three Essays on the Sociology of Action. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Sabugal, P., & Seebach, S. (2021). Introduction. Simmel in/on love. Simmel Studies, 25(2), 9-25.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Catherine Hakim. 2010. “Erotic capital” European Sociological Review 26(5): 499-518

Marie Bergstöm and Sandra Brée. 2023. “Not a single meaning: Definition and evolution of singlehood in France and the United States” Journal of Family Theory and Review 15(3): 465-484.

Week 9

The responsibility debate - Does sociology, which often pays attention to the factors shaping personal trajectories and worldviews, leave room for the assessment of individual merit and responsibility? Can sociology combine the analysis of socialization and rational choices? Is all social action rational when viewed

from the standpoint of the actor? Can apparently altruistic acts be reconciled with rational choice theory? Is the latter a reductionism? Is self-interest a testable hypothesis or a tautology? Is merit the capacity to be reflexive about one’s own socialization and break previous habits? How does sociology study morals? Is self-interest a value peculiar to modern Western societies? Do some national societies and/or social groups rely particularly (and more than others) on morals based on responsibility? How?

Raymond Boudon, ‘Social Determinisms and Individual Freedom’, The Unintended Consequences of Social Action, 1982

James S. Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory, 1994, ch.1.

Complementary reading:

Stephen Holmes, ‘The Secret History of Self-Interest’, Jane Mansbridge (ed.), Beyond Self- Interest, 1990.

Peter Hedström and Peter Bearman, ‘What is Analytical Sociology All About? An Introductory Essay’, Hedström and Bearman (eds), Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology 2011

Robert Merton, ‘The Unanticipated Consequences of Social Action’, ASR 1, 1936

Week 10

The violence debate I - Famously, Max Weber argued that the modern State is and should be the only legitimate user of violence. Yet, violence is exercised by multiple actors including non-state ones (some of which aspire to become states). Does it follow that the Weberian perspective privileges the status quo? To what extent can traditional mafias and criminal gangs exercise legitimate forms of violence? Is the governscapes perspective epistemologically productive? Why do people use violence instead of finding a compromise? Are “war” and “peace” useful analytical categories for sociologists?

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Weber, M. (2016). Economy and society. In Democracy: A Reader (pp. 247-251). Columbia University Press.

Federico Varese, ‘What is Organized Crime?’, Organized Crime, 2010

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Imbusch, P., Misse, M., & Carrión, F. (2011). Violence research in Latin America and the Caribbean: A literature review. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV), 5(1), 87-154.

Elijah Anderson - "The Code of the Street" From Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City (Introduction and Chapter 1)

Week 11

The violence debate II - Is any form of power relation inherently violent and are all social orders rooted in violence? Can we measure violence through its indirect outcomes? Is symbolic violence really violence? Are people brought to violence by violent socialization or by specific structures of opportunity? Has there really been a civilizing process? How is violence justified?

Suggestions of mandatory readings for the students:

Charles Tilly - "War Making and State Making as Organized Crime"In Bringing the State Back In, edited by Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol. Cambridge University Press, 1985.

Burawoy, M. (2019). Symbolic violence: conversations with Bourdieu. Duke University Press.

Suggestions of references to build the lectures:

Feltran, G. (Ed.). (2021). Stolen cars: a journey through São Paulo's urban conflict. John Wiley & Sons.

Week 12 (Theme chosen by students)

In this lesson, we will discuss a topic of the students' choice. The idea is to show how we can approach any social issue from different sociological perspectives. Different groups will present different perspectives (theoretical, methodological) on the same topic of study/debate.

Requirements

Students should read all the assigned readings before the class and come to section’s classes with comments and criticisms on the readings, to be able to present the main contents, consistently participate in class discussions, and respect deadlines.

Grades

Grades are between 0 and 20

.

General information

Faculty:

Prof. Gabriel Feltran. On my webpage at CEE Sciences Po you can find useful links for sociological research, as well as my cv.

Office Hours:

scheduled in advance by email, always in office B-320, Campus St Thomas- Paris, or on zoom, Fridays afternoon..

Office Address:

Sciences Po Urban School, campus St Thomas, room H ES 09

Recommendation letters:

Students asking me for a recommendation letter must send me their CV at least two weeks before the deadline.

Contacts:

gabriel.feltran@sciencespo.fr (answers in one week, not in real time, sorry)

Cities are back in town

This is the website of the research program in urban studies at Sciences Po. You can find a lot of interesting news on seminars, publications, urban data, and

so on: http://blogs.sciences-po.fr/recherche-villes/

DISABILITY ACCOMMODATIONS

To benefit from Disability Accommodations and obtain an accommodation letter, please contact Sciences Po’s Disability Services promptly at pole.handicap@sciencespo.fr. Accommodations are not retroactive. If you wish to receive accommodations in this class, you will need to provide me with the accommodation letter from Sciences Po’s Disability Services. We will then discuss specifically how to meet your needs. Letters received with too short notice prior to an assessment do not guarantee you access to your accommodations.

None

The course will take place over the twelve weeks of the semester and will include one two-hour weekly lecture and one two-hour weekly section seminars devoted to an in-depth discussion of two papers (scholarly articles or book chapters) previously read by the students. For these sections, students will work with Ricardo Paiva as chargé de conférence.

Two main components will determine them:

• Your overall grade will be determined by midterm (40%) and final term exams 60%
• In the context of the discussion sessions, whose grade counts for 2/3 of the overall grade: you will be asked to provide a few weekly notes about the texts assigned for reading (which will count for 60% of the discussion sessions’ grade) and you will have to give a brief presentation by the end of the course (40%).

Class Pedagogical Instruments and Skills Development

The two weekly papers. I ask you to carefully study these two texts by prominent scholars in sociology for developing the following skills:

● To structure your intellectual approach towards social problems.

● Having a robust knowledge of theories and main results in sociology.

● It knows how to work and read over a long period, reflecting, meditating, and dedicating time to assimilate.

Q&A (my questions, your answers): I ask you to come prepared and develop a conversation with me starting from my questions for developing your skills related to:

● Having excellent conceptual language for theoretical sociology

● Managing the information received, sort and summarise it.

● Knowing how to organise your time, make priorities, respecting deadlines so to arrive prepared for each session

● Do not remain shy or passive; learn how to get out of your comfort zone.

Q&A (your questions, my answers): I ask you to prepare questions on the readings for developing your skills related to

● Distinguishing between the descriptive and normative accounts of an social phenomenon

● To move from facts, techniques and data to their critical analysis.

Self-evaluation questionnaires. During the semester, I will send you short online questionnaires to self-assess the advancement of your knowledge and the skills you are acquiring (or missing). I will ask you to fill out these forms for improving the following skills:

● Knowing how to record one's progress over a long period

● Knowing how to formulate what you don't know, understanding the limits of what you cannot do, accepting and having the right to make mistakes.

● Know how to develop reflexivity on the acquisition of one's skills and actions

Two academic papers will be read each week, and there is a third non mandatory paper for those interested in deepening their knowledge. They will form the basis of the master lecture in the amphitheater and the discussion with the course assistants in the special sections.

We have a basic sociological reading for this course: Nan de Graaf and Dingeman Wiertz. 2019.Social Problems as Public Evils. London: Routledge.

Not as required reading, but as a reference book to help study and delve into different theoretical frameworks: George Ritzer & Jeffrey N. Stepnisky (2021).Sociological Theory. London: Sage (11th edition).Important: For exchange students who have never taken a sociology course, the following textbook will be very helpful and must be read during the summer: Frank van Tubergen. 2022.

Introduction to Sociology. London: Routledge