These books are both different. You may be surprised to learn that neither of the books require (or even advise) total abstinence from alcohol, and both strip out the heavy duty demonization and moralization that often goes a long with this disease (like you are someone weak and deficient because you are an alcoholic). Instead they advise, in an open and sensible manner free of the prohibition like frenzy that often surrounds this social problem, change in diet, lifestyle, and attention to whatever social or emotional pathologies may encourage addictive behavior. Recognizing that alcohol, like other addictive substances, provides an endorphin rush (i.e. they make your brain feel good), the books develop treatment strategies that deal with that. Treatment  involves a pharmacological intervention that interferes with the uptake of endorphins in the brain (thus robbing you of the feel good properties of alcohol) and dramatically reducing craving over time. The book authors claim success rates as high as 80% which is incredible considering how difficult addictions are to treat. I haven’t seen these treatments in action yet, though I do have a client who I’m hoping will try them out. They do, however, seem highly promising, and they are backed by serious scientific research.

alchohol treatment

Now as a sociologist I usually don’t buy into biological or genetic explanations of anything.  For me traditional psychology has too narrow a focus and it misses a lot of key causal factors when it approaches psychological dysfunction. I understand the power that advertising, the media, and our social groups have to determine our behavior and personality so from my sociologically sophisticated perspective, even something as “genetic” as IQ isn’t really genetic at all, but social. Still, what I found most interesting about the books from a sociological point of view was the emphasis on the relationship between alcohol and endorphins, a biological process.  Endorphins of course are the natural “feel good” drugs in your brain. Similar to morphine, the body releases endorphins in responses to both positive and negative stimuli.  Stress and pain cause endorphin release, but also laughter and orgasm. In addition, long distance running has long been associated with endorphin release (the so called “runner’s high”). Endorphins are the body’s “feel good” system and lack of endorphins may lead to depression. Drinking alcohol is a way to encourage endorphin release in the brain.

But why do you need alcohol to encourage endorphin release if it is released by other activities?

So what are you going to do about this? Well, if there is an addiction present the implications are clear, you have to break the chemical association and change your environment so your body is not so overwhelmed that it needs additional medication. We now know how to break the chemical association in the brain (both books reviewed here provide a solution). The harder part is cleaning up our social environments; but at least now you know where to start looking.

Foreclosures.

Debt.

And now even the poor, destitute, handicapped, and even the aging veterans are being hung out to sacrifice.  If the government doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, says Obama, people are going to die.

It’s getting ugly! People are losing everything and no amount of infrastructure spending, foreign trade, or economic growth seems able to fix it. The U.S. economy is dying a slow death and we seem helpless to do anything and hopeless that anything might be done.

But what is the problem, after all? Trillions of dollars are floating around the global economy, more money than this world has ever seen before, and none of that can be made to work in the U.S. economy.

That doesn’t make any sense.

Where has all the money gone?

Well, think back to just before George Bush left office.

Remember what happened?

Panic in the [Wall]Street.

Desperation at the bank.

Global economic collapse was just around the corner they said!

“Quick,” said Bush. “Give the bankers all the money and that will fix it.”

Ya right.

Despite every single developed country falling in line and handing public funds over to private bankers, it didn’t fix it. The economies still chug along and the common folk still struggle to hang on to the things that they’ve worked for.

So what’s up with that?

Well, according to Michael Sharp it has everything to do with debt, accumulation, and greed. The problem isn’t that the economy is broken, or that money is evil, or that we can’t find a way to work things out so everybody has job, and everybody can be happy and prosperous. The problem is, like Warren Buffet (one of the richest men in the world) recently said in a NY Times article, some people have control and they are using that control in greedy accumulation that, far from benefiting the global economy actually undermines it. According to Michael Sharp the destruction of the economy is inevitable because of a fundamental flaw in the way we organize exchange and the nice thing is (if there is anything nice about this), you don’t need a PhD in economics to understand what is going on or figure out what we need to do. As Michael Sharp says, it’s not rocket science, just basic economic common sense.

I read Michael Sharp’s book ‘The Rocket Scientists Guide to Money and the Economy: Accumulation and Debt’ about two months ago.  I found Michael to be one of the most accessible writers I have ever come across and a seriously potent story teller.  It is so refreshing to find someone who explains complicated economic matters in such a logical, clear, self-evident and understandable way.  Economists are so good at talking over our heads and confusing people.  I can’t even understand most of them and I have been trained in the economic discipline. I found Michael’s book to be very well informed but a simply presented argument and story that explains the main problems with our economic system.  He is also one of the only people I have found who has highlighted the broader social consequences (for everyone) of individualistic money accumulation behaviours.   His work has helped me to clarify my own thinking and fit together a whole lot of different things that have been troubling me and filled in some big gaps too.  I am now in a much better position to articulate my own ideas that build on his, and I have begun to do so.  So you might say that his book has empowered me.  I’m sure it will do the same for many other ordinary people, and hopefully some economists too.  They could also learn a lot about how to write and communicate from Michael Sharp. Maura Andrew – M.A. Economics Student, South Africa

If you want to learn more, check out his book Rocket Scientists’ Guide to Money and the Economy: Accumulation and Debt.  It’s not an academic book in the traditional sense but it is a powerful story about the nature of economics and the trouble we have managed to get ourselves into. It is grist for the intellectual mill, enlightening beyond measure, and a testament to the power of the pen, even if I do say so myself.

John D. Carl. THINK Social Problems. Boston: Pearson. 2011. 342 pp. $71.33.

James W. Coleman and Harold R. Kerbo. Social Problems. 10th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2009. 525 pp. $86.60.

Corey Dolgon and Chris Baker. Social Problems: A Service Learning Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. 2010. 459 pp. $56.95.

D. Stanley Eitzen, Maxine Baca Zinn, and Kelly Eitzen Smith. Social Problems. 12th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2011. 637pp. $124.20.

James M. Henslin. Social Problems: A Down-To-Earth Approach. 10th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2011. 558 pp. $121.20.

Diana Kendall. Social Problems in a Diverse Society. 5th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2010. 444 pp. $108.20.

William Kornblum and Joseph Julian. Social Problems. 13th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2009. 570 pp. $121.20.

Robert H. Lauer and Jeanette C. Lauer. Social Problems and the Quality of Life. 12th ed. 2011. 557 pp. $115.31.

John J. Macionis. Social Problems. 4th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2010. 520pp. $121.20.

Linda A. Mooney, David Knox, and Caroline Schacht. Understanding Social Problems. 7th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. 2011. 673 pp. $136.95.

Thomas J. Sullivan. Introduction to Social Problems. 8th ed. Boston: Pearson. 2009. 480 pp. $86.60.

Lorne Tepperman and Josh Curtis. Social Problems: A Canadian Perspective. 3d ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press. 2011. $88.95 Canadian.

Reviewed by Lutz Kaelber, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA

Social Problems

A quick glance at the undergraduate course offerings of the top U.S. graduate programs in sociology reveals that many of them offer social problems, in various forms and iterations, on a regular basis. The content of the most recent compilation of teaching materials compiled and edited by Walter Carroll and this reviewer for the American Sociological Association in 2007 indicates correspondingly that social problems continues to be taught as a core course in the sociology curriculum in educational communities as diverse as community colleges, large research universities, and small liberal arts colleges. Not surprisingly, the popularity of social problems as a substantive field is matched by an array of textbooks from which instructors can choose. After publications older than 2009, compilations of readings, books focusing exclusively on “solutions to social problems,” and textbooks in neighboring fields such as global problems and social issues were excluded from this review, still about a dozen remain. One of them is a textbook on social problems in Canada, chosen because it allows for a cross-cultural comparison in what researchers and textbook authors come to identify as a social problem. This is particularly evident in the ways in which textbooks cover health care as a social problem, a topic to which this review pays particular attention.

The texts stretch over many hundreds of pages. One tome, Mooney, Knox, and Schacht’s Understanding Social Problems, expands to almost 700 pages, and even one that claims on its back cover “not to bog [students] down with extraneous information,” by Coleman and Kerbo, comes in at about 500. The heft of the materials corresponds to their retail prices, which average about $100 and top out at close to $140 (Mooney et al.). Like the numbers of pages, the costs per page are hardly uniform: while Kendall’s textbook has the highest, at close to 25 cent per page, for most the costs fall in the range between 18 and 22 cents. Dolgon and Baker’s textbook costs less than half per page than Kendall’s and is a bargains in this field, which goes to show that cost-conscious instructors have an option when it comes to choosing value-priced texts. The consideration of relative costs and volume comes with a caveat, however, for the textbooks vary considerably in terms of the amount of text that is placed on a typical page, depending mostly on layout and font size.

Some textbooks prioritize large visual displays over text-based depictions. The greatest extent to which that is the case is Carl’s textbook, THINK Social Problems, which is visually the most distinctive among them. It graces its front page with a layout that seems to have taken its inspiration from a popular magazine, highlighting topics it considers the most appealing to readers (“Is health care a right or a privilege?—p. 135”). Almost every page contains a large picture, chart, or table, with equally outsized captions, while the text itself is set in a relatively small and faint font. The first impression is that of a picture book: the charts contain only basic information and dominate the text, which fades into the background and thus appears to matter less. Its title appears to be a misnomer–LOOK Social Problems might be more appropriate. Every topic is addressed through the all-too-familiar prism of functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism, a common feature of all textbooks. In terms of depth, Carl’s text does not go much beyond what introductory sociology textbooks offer, and there are omissions. For example, the chapter on health explains what osteopaths do but not much about the three main problems of American health care: cost of care, health insurance coverage for the population, and condition (health outcomes such as longevity and infant mortality), and in the discussion of the pros and cons of government-provided health insurance, the author reports false assertions such as such a system would lead to higher taxes but fails to put them under critical scrutiny. The book is clearly meant to appeal to freshmen with no or only the most basic notions of sociology or social sciences. But in pitching to those students, it does have a few redeeming qualities. The prose is lucid and succinct, the information, up-to-date, the scope of comparison, international and multi-cultural. Key concepts are explained at the end of each chapter. The easily accessible and comparatively low priced book succeeds in giving student a basic familiarity with core problem areas in American society and beyond, and students will probably like it. I hesitate to recommend it for instructors whose students typically have taken an introductory sociology course already.

Even Carl’s relatively slim textbook contains no fewer than 20 chapters and covers a familiar potpourri of substantive problem areas: inequality, race, gender, politics, education, health, aging, drugs, sexuality, crime, family, population, globalization, the environment and international conflict. The other textbooks cover most of this spectrum as well, which raises the issues how many chapters in any one of them an instructor would actually be able to assign in a regular academic session. Even longer semesters do not go beyond 15 weeks, and accounting for exam and other non-instructional periods, 12 weeks and 1 chapter a week will probably be the most that is feasible. Hence, a good half of the topics in most textbooks might not be covered.

Another relative bargain, Coleman and Kerbo’s textbook, tells its student readers on its back cover that it “can be read in approximately 20 hours,” or one hour per chapter. Such a dubious claim is especially unfortunate in light of the fact that theirs is actually a textbook that sustains an in-depth narrative. The text is very well written and complemented by the inclusion of figures far less elementary but equally international when compared to Carl’s textbook, and occasionally of small pictures. Core terms are highlighted and defined in the margins. The only downside is the placement of the theoretical perspectives, including feminism, toward the end of each chapter, which comes almost as an afterthought and is more an obligatory nod to pedagogical convention that substantive enrichment. Coleman and Kerbo do what Carl does not, namely attempt to state putative causes of social problems. Health care is fairly well covered, even though the authors have little to say about differences in health outcomes. Overall, this textbook is one of the best values among the bunch and recommended for undergraduate sociology students at any level.

The same cannot be said about the cheapest textbook included here, Dolgon and Baker’s Social Problems: A Service Learning Approach. Visually it is downright austere (the pictures are in black and white, and the text is in black and blue), but the numbers are often a bit dated, the sources sometimes not clearly identified, and the authors seem unaware of the scientific convention that one ought to identify precise page numbers when particular ideas or passages are quoted or paraphrased. The media boxes and case studies in each chapter seem a good idea, except for the fact that there are too many of them, and they take up so much space that that the text itself invariably seems too short. Moreover, they go on for so many pages that a student reader might get lost in the text. It is also one of the most U.S.-centric texts, as international developments receive little attention, particularly in the sections on inequality, population, and health care. The coverage of the latter is short, although it includes a well-argued but all-too-brief section on the history of the American health care system. The textbook’s strengths lie in the identification of experiential education opportunities (the service learning component indicated in the title) and a good glossary at the end of each chapter. The “view from the field,” in which individuals describe their work-related experiences in dealing with social problems, is also unique and valuable. Still, it is not nearly as easy to recommend this textbook, despite its value pricing, as Coleman and Kerbo’s.

What, then, do other, higher-priced or thicker textbooks, or those who have more text per page, provide that the cheaper and thinner ones don’t? Sometimes not much. The behemoth in this group, the textbook by Mooney et al., has “only” 15 chapters, but it covers all the major topics (with the exception of problems of politics and government), and in considerable detail. Added benefits include the copious provision of terms and definitions in the margins and short vignettes and photo essays. The authors make excellent use of figures and tables and go light on pictures. As is the glossary in the back of the book, the chapter reviews at the end of the chapters are precisely written and one of the book’s best features. Each chapter also has a number of test questions, with answers provided on the same pages. Health care is covered in detail. Anyone who has trouble reading tiny fonts will not be happy with the typeset, however, as some of the captions and sections of text are type set in what looks a like a font that is as small as a 8 points. Is the over $40 price premium over Coleman and Kerbo’s textbook justified? Hardly. If the book were priced closer to $100, it would be easier to recommend.

Among the higher-priced textbooks, those by Henslin and Eitzen, Zinn, and Smith are of outstanding quality. The former is among the best in guiding the students through the maze of topics with a clear layout, an easy-to-understand and –follow narrative, and a wealth of figures and tables. The figures and tables are not presented as an afterthought, but rather anchor the accompanying text empirically, and they are invariably well conceived and pertinent. The “spotlights” on social research are a terrific feature, for they highlight some major scholars’ motivations for and experiences during doing research on social problems. Drawbacks include a section on future problems at the end of each chapter that is so short to be almost meaningless and the fact that in the chapter of health care it does not address the problem of coverage. Henslin’s is a very nicely produced textbook, which might justify its somewhat high price. It is particularly well suited for beginning students, especially if an instructor’s goal is to teach students numerical literacy.

In comparison, Eitzen et al. pitch their book more to mid-level to advanced students with some previous exposure to sociology via an introductory course. The textbook’s visual layout is clear and text-heavy, using a moderate number of tables and figures and very few vignettes, textboxes, or other elements interspersed with the text. It is arguably the most critical of the social conditions in American society. The authors present a perspective from the political left, but they are not doctrinaire, and they present information that is tied in with the latest research and go into great depth with most topics, particularly in crisis areas such as health care, education, and inequality. Instructors and student will welcome the inclusion of a chapter on disability. Two drawbacks are minor: the list of key terms at the end of each chapter could be longer, and at the beginning of each chapter, the authors delve directly into the subject matter without giving the reader much indication about what the chapter is about. Given the depth in which the authors address their subject matter, and their obvious expertise in doing so, it is perhaps the outstanding textbook of the bunch, not least because of its critical stance. If instructors wanted to choose a textbook for preparing lectures, this would be the one.

In terms of per-page costs, Kendall’s book, Social Problems in a Diverse Society, is the most expensive. It uses a two-column layout that visually appears to cram text onto the page, and the author seems generally averse to providing quantitative data. What stands out in the table of contents is not the core subject matter for each chapter, set in a tiny font, but various boxes that allude to subject matter ostensibly more palatable to student readers. In regard to content, its section on pornography is outdated; the section on problems in health care, brief; and the chapter summaries, somewhat pedestrian. Its strengths are that it is well written and presents a balanced depiction of major social problems, including a valuable chapter on the media. In some sections, it seems, Kendall writes as if to persuade students that a social problem is real, and the people affected by it typically not the ones who ought to be blamed for it. She clearly does not aim to “preach to the choir” but rather to open the minds of students to issues that they previously may not have known or understood. The student demographic targeted is perhaps a somewhat older, more conservative one, at the beginning of their undergraduate studies, and for instructors drawing students from such a demographic group this textbook might be a suitable choice.

Macionis’s Social Problems employs a similar “text-cramming” strategy as Kendall’s textbook does, except that there are sometimes three columns to a page, and the fonts used are often even smaller. Numerical data are scarce, but the textbook includes a series of nicely prepared maps and intersperses text with pictures and various boxes, includes ones on the construction on social problems, which are generally well conceived. The visual summary at the end of each chapter is a unique and arguably one of the best features of this textbook. With its appealing layout and easily accessible prose, it is suitable for students at any undergraduate level. The chapter on health care is a mixed bag: while the inclusion of a variety of other countries is an effective pedagogical tool to sensitize students about the strengths and weaknesses of different heath care systems, the section on American care system is weak. It does not inform the reader that the current problem with coverage lies not only in a complete lack of health insurance for a part of the population, but also in the lack of coverage in case of catastrophic illness for others, and in the section on costs the author does not mention that it is not the spread of private insurance per se that matters as much as the concomitant high expenses for administration. The textbook replicates the familiar scheme of functional, conflict, and symbolic-interactionist analysis of each social problem area, but is also includes for each the different perspectives conservatives, liberal, and what Macionis calls the “radical left” bring to bear on a social problem. With a strong focus on international issues, this textbook ranks with Mooney et al.’s, Coleman and Kerbo’s, Henslin’s, and Eitzen et al.’s as one of the best written and conceived materials, even though it does not address the problems in the same depth as those do.

Kornblum and Julian’s Social Problems disappoints on some levels, as it looks and reads a little bit like a carryover from the 1980s (the first edition of this textbook indeed dates back to 1983). The textbook presents data sparsely, the data are often severely dated, and the margin to the right or left on each page is unseemly huge. The visual layout is unappealing; if the included pictures’ purpose is to create among students interest in the subject matter, they only moderately achieve this goal. The international component is not very strong. The strength of this textbook lies in its writing style, suitable for beginning students. The prose is relatively simple and easy to understand, even for students without a strong preparation for college. “Dominant trends” are presented at each chapter and help frame the presentation of the topics. Problems in health care are not commingled in a single chapter with mental illness, which is often the case in other textbooks. The chapter itself is adequate. Many chapters also include a section providing explanations of the particular social problem, presented in straightforward and concise manner. Overall, in spite of these positive features, the authors would be well advised to revise their textbook entirely and freshen its look, and the book would to have been priced considerably below $100 to be considered competitive in this group. As it is now, the textbook is difficult to recommend.

Certain issues with visual appeal are also evident in Sullivan’s Introduction to Social Problem and Lauer/Lauer’s Social Problems and the Quality of Life. Sullivan’s textbook uses green and black as text colors throughout: the figures use green lines, the captions of photos are set against a green background, and the headings are in green also. All pictures are black and white. Together this makes for a rather unappealing mix, especially since text paragraphs are long and key concepts, set in bold, occur only occasionally. Once students overcome these barriers to accessing the text, they are rewarded with precisely worded accounts of the origins, manifestations, and consequences of social problems. Generally, in each chapter the author first employs the main theoretical perspectives to allude to different causes of a social problem and then presents information about its extent. Particularly useful is a section on “Future Prospects,” which points to likely developments in the next few years and beyond, and on myths and misconceptions. Summaries at the end of each chapter are well presented, followed by a particularly detailed review section, with multiple-choice, true/false, fill in, matching, and essay questions. Since the questions vary from easy to quite difficult and are well matched to the content, instructors could probably adopt quite a few of these questions for their exams, giving students thereby the opportunity to prepare by answering these questions in advance. A short list of further readings is also included with each chapter. Highlights of the contents are valuable chapters on problems in corporate and government power, and on the environment. The section on health care, on the other hand, is less satisfactory: health care costs in the U.S. are not compared to those in other countries, and a major element that explains the higher costs in the U.S., bureaucratic waste in private insurance, remains unmentioned, as does the problem of a lack of coverage in case of catastrophic illness. While data about the relatively low life expectancy and high infant mortality rates in the U.S. are presented, the link to problems in access to, and delivery of, medical care is not mentioned. Overall, the textbook is fairly solid, and at under $100, a relative bargain.

Lauer and Lauer’s textbook uses a brownish red for what Sullivan’s uses green, but the outcome is similar: it is rather drab looking book, with black-and-white pictures that look rather dull and pages that have a large margin on one side. The summaries at the end of each chapter do not seem concise enough, and the key terms listed there are too few. The study questions provided are of a general nature and not precise and focused enough to allow for a concise review of the content. Key terms highlighted in the margins are explained or defined well, but there are too few of them. Despite sections dedicated to global comparisons, these comparisons are made far too infrequently, and when they are, they tend to portray the U.S. is a less critical light that what is suggested by the data. Apart from these issues, some features of this textbook are commendable. Throughout, it takes on fallacies, or misconceptions, as a “critical thinking” exercise. A chapter begins with a brief personal story that is invariably well chosen to create interest in the topic and lays out the main objectives, and then begins with a short statement in the introduction about the chapter content. Well conceived are the sections on what the authors discuss as social structural and social psychological factors that are in play. The discussion of these factors is detailed, and an indication that the text, which also provides more complex sentence structures and lines of argument that is typical, is targeting students who are somewhat advanced in their undergraduate studies or have had some exposure to sociology before. Still, I am hesitant to recommend this book, for the following reason: provided that the extent of a social problem is often more salient when viewed in comparative perspective and within both a national and international context, Lauer and Lauer often fail to provide such perspective and context. While students learn that thirteen states in the U.S. do not have a death penalty and read about the types of violent crime, the author do not point out that the U.S. is one of very few industrialized countries that has capital punishment, yet her violent crime rates (murder and rape) are also very high. For inequality, students do not read that the U.S. has an extraordinarily and increasing inequality in income (and, to some extent, also wealth), and the statistic about unemployment in the U.S. (for 2007; p. 300) makes it appear as if the U.S. had a lower unemployment rate than most countries such as Canada, Germany, and the Sweden, when in fact the unemployment rates in those countries are currently below the U.S.’s, with a considerably tighter social security net to boot. In the chapter on health care, the authors wrongly claim that “more than 100 million Americans now have no coverage at all” (p. 369), and they address the core problems only in a short paragraph, with no substantive follow up. I do not wish to suggest that Lauer and Lauer intended to hide these problems or be uncritical of certain social conditions, but the shortcomings seem serious enough to caution against using this textbook in its current edition.

Lastly, Tepperman and Curtis’s quite cheaply priced textbook on social problems in Canada is interesting as a study in contrast to the American textbooks. Its structure differs little from the latter: it covers a similar range of topics, and each chapter begins with learning objectives, followed by an introduction, presentation of the major themes, and application of the three familiar theoretical perspectives. Each chapter also includes a separate section on the consequences of each social problem, and possible solutions, with a modicum of pictures. Those sections are an excellent feature of this textbook. Its visual layout is straightforward and makes it easy to navigate the book. The content is less aimed at comparing Canada to the U.S. than one might expect. In terms of addressing health care as a social problem, the contrast is stark, however: the only hint at a crisis in Canadian health care occurs in the context of a section on “waiting times,” which actually does little to address the rationing of certain health procedures for certain non-emergent procedures—apart from the fact that Canada’s expenditures on health care as a percentage of GDP, while trailing the U.S. by fair margin, are actually quite high in international comparison. Still, to paraphrase a point made by a Minnesota senator recently, how many medical bankruptcies are there each year in Canada compared to the U.S.?

What then is the overall verdict on the state of the art in textbooks on social problems? The textbooks reflect a medium-to-high degree of competence, knowledge, and didactic skill among their authors. There are definite signs of cloning among the textbooks, not dissimilar to the academic market in introductory sociology. All of them more or less cover the same topics, although in different level of depth and from slightly differently angles. Exposing students to such a wide array of issues poses the danger that students will learn a little about many things, but not a whole lot about anything. The shotgun approach in the textbooks might not serve students all that well. What might get lost in emphasizing breadth over depth is the distinctive profile of the United States in terms of her social problems (and sometimes also in successes in dealing with them). What might a textbook that addresses such a profile look like? It might focus on the enormous challenges of immigration and multiculturalism the United States has faced, as many nations around the globe consider this one of the more salient relative success stories of the United States. It might also highlight the United States’s enormous per-capita energy use, her contributions to the exhaustion of natural resources and global warming, her tremendous income and wealth disparities, the dysfunctional nature of her health care system, her status as the absolute superpower in the global theater of international relations, her failures in secondary education (as evidenced in the TIMSS and PISA studies, which many of the textbook author still fail to acknowledge), a frail and porous social safety net, a system of crime and punishment with high violent crime and incarceration rates and relatively stiff punishments, and the continued societal debates about equality in terms of gender, disability, and sexual identity. The textbook that addresses these topics and others with the most expertise and in the greatest depth is Eitzen et al.’s, which is my choice for the best textbook overall

[amazonify]0309105862[/amazonify]In an effort to extol the virtues of evolution, the National Academy of Sciences has published an updated version of Science, Evolution, and Creationism (2008). In this brief, but colorful book, a coterie of prestigious scientists take readers on a whirlwind tour of the triumphant and tumultuous history of evolutionary theory. It’s quite a story. There’s a surprising amount of information packed into this brief overview. Still, brainy as the book’s team of co-authors happens to be, they have also worked hard to ensure that Science, Evolution, and Creationism remains accessible. And, sure enough, it’s a relatively easy read; anyone with an eighth grade education should be able to knock this out in an afternoon. In addition, I suspect that Science, Evolution, and Creationism has been intentionally designed to look and feel like a Dr. Seuss book (it’s about the same size, thickness and weight) in order to encourage readers of all ages to explore its pages. Presumably, the National Academy of Sciences has learned something from all the librarians who insist that half the literacy battle lies in finding some way to get kids–and adults!–to pick up books. I guess it’s worth a try.

Science as religion and ideology

Also, if you have an aptitude for reading between the lines, it will quickly become apparent that the National Academy of Sciences is intent on achieving a number of additional objectives with Science, Evolution, and Creationism. While the book is certainly a recruitment tool, it is also loaded with pre-emptive messages for would-be opponents of evolutionary theory. In particular, Science, Evolution, and Creationism is composed as a one-sided debate with Creationism: a debate, the book emphasizes, that evolution has consistently won ever since  Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859. Evolution is a theory, the National Academy of Science will have you know, that has endured intensive scientific scrutiny and fiery public debate. Yet, despite the plaudits of the scientific community, throughout its history, various groups have repeatedly taken steps to undermine evolutionary theory, and nowhere more so than in the classroom (Monastersky, Richard, 2006; Simon, 2008). Indeed, it was just such an episode that motivated the National Academy of Sciences to republish this updated version of Science, Evolution, and Creationism.

During the fall of 2004, the Dover Area School District enacted a resolution that required all of its ninth grade biology teachers to read a statement asserting that evolution was such a feeble perspective that it was hardly worthy of being called a theory. In addition, the statement touted “Intelligent Design” as an appealing alternative, and even went so far as to proffer copies of a best-selling Intelligent Design text, Of Pandas and People (1989). To their credit, Dover’s ninth grade biology teachers, citing a Pennsylvania educational code stating that teachers cannot present information to students that they believe is false, refused to read the statement. When a school administrator insisted on reading the statement anyway, a group of parents filed a lawsuit.

After a lengthy bench trial, Judge John E. Jones III ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. Essentially, Judge Jones concluded that Intelligent Design was a thinly-veiled version of Creationism and, as such, lacked the necessary scientific substance to serve as a rigorous counterpoint to evolution. Upon the announcement of this decision, supporters of evolutionary theory, both inside and outside the scientific community, breathed a collective sigh of relief. Yet again, the most important biological theory in the history of science had overcome a stealth attack from its theologically-motivated rivals.

Still, important as this decision might have been for supporters of evolutionary theory, there was no time to celebrate. A variety of opinion polls conducted during 2005 revealed that a substantial portion of the general public remained unswayed by the logic of evolutionary theory. In spite of the longstanding dominance of evolutionary theory in scientific circles (and, yes, in high school biology text books), in 2005, nearly fifty percent of Americans held fast to profoundly anti-evolutionary convictions such as: “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time” (Goodstein, 2005), or “God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so” (Keeter, 2005). Scientists may have won their battle in court, but they were losing the more treacherous struggle to influence public opinion.

For the scientific community this was a body blow. After all, evolution has been the dominant theory in the field of biology for over a hundred years. Among serious scientists there is almost zero dispute about the validity of evolutionary theory. It’s a simple theory that explains a heck of a lot (i.e., nearly everything you could ever want to know about the history of life on the planet). What’s not to like?

Bitter as it may be, the scientific community has had to face the fact that, for those whose daily round carries them outside the sphere of scientific endeavor, evolutionary theory remains unsatisfying. Although the search for scientific truth operates independently of public opinion (e.g., scientific truths, such as Einstein’s contention that space is curved, are often at variance with widespread perceptions of reality), nevertheless, public antipathy can sometimes legitimate policy decisions that stymie scientific progress (Bellomo, 2006). Thus, evolutionary scientists would be ill-advised to ignore such a resounding expression of negative public sentiment. Something would have to be done. But precisely what sort of response should the scientific community mount?

Although evolution offers cunningly plausible explanations for the key processes that constitute life on the planet earth, nevertheless, there are important aspects of human existence that evolution currently fails to compass. For example, evolutionary theory provides weak-at-best spiritual support for a planet full of soul-searching mortals.

At some point in our lives, just about everyone ponders big questions such as: Who am I? Why am I here? What is the meaning of life? Being the parsimonious scientific theory that it is, evolution offers much more nimble responses to questions concerning the mechanics of life than its aesthetics. Thus, evolution’s answer to such profound philosophical questions typically boils down to, “stuff happens.” While such a view might be logical and acceptable to evolutionary scientists, for anyone plagued by deep-seated concerns about the ultimate meaning of existence, “stuff happens” simply doesn’t cut it. Soul-searchers crave answers that are more personally relevant than evolution’s standard shtick: “Life as we know it has been shaped by a fortuitous convergence of random natural processes, etc., etc….”

Of course, scientists look forward to the happy day when they will be able to construct a “Theory of Everything” (Hawking, 2007). However, for now, the scientific grasp of the cosmos in any field, though impressive, is far from encompassing. While evolution can explain much about the history of life on the planet, it cannot yet answer every question that humans contemplate, e.g., What is the significance of being? For those issues that evolution is unprepared to tackle, it is appropriate for scientists either to remain mum, or, as the National Academy of Science has elected to do in Science, Evolution, and Creationism, to open the door to other opinions. Having delineated their differences with theology, the authors of Science, Evolution, and Creationism have also incorporated numerous observations from scientists and theologians who argue that religion and evolution need not be perceived as contradictory. The implication being that, since science and theology explore a variety of issues that do not overlap, one could argue that these distinct endeavors might somehow be complimentary–or, at least, there are many issues over which adherents of these perspectives need not go to war…at least not at the moment.

As such, Science, Evolution, and Creationism is designed to chart a new course through the minefields of public opinion and, thereby, win over a larger percentage of reluctant converts. Science, Evolution, and Creationism asserts that religion and evolution need not be at loggerheads; if they work diligently to avoid stepping on each other’s toes, there is a distinct possibility that religious dogma and evolution can work side-by-side. Therefore, individuals who seek solace in the realms of religion can also seek answers to many of life’s enduring mysteries in the fields of scientific endeavor.

Interesting strategy, but will it work?

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that the National Academy of Sciences’ strategy is effective: lots of recruits pick up Science, Evolution, and Creationism and, in its pages, get an updated introduction to evolutionary theory. Now for the million-dollar question, ”Will new readers come away more favorably disposed toward evolution?”

That’s a tough question. To be perfectly honest (though I am sorry to say it), I don’t think so. More than anything, Science, Evolution, and Creationism offers a condensed overview of the protracted battle between evolution and its tenacious (often theological) detractors. Frankly, I think opponents of evolution will be unimpressed by the book’s token concessions to theology, whereas the majority of scientists will scoff at the suggestion that theology can provide any useful avenues of enlightenment. Therefore, in spite of the National Academy of Sciences’ attempt to coordinate a Creation-Evolution group hug, the disconnect between evolution and many of its theological opponents are simply too deep and unyielding to permit meaningful compromise. Having gone their separate ways, these distinct paradigms will remain on separate and antagonistic intellectual trajectories until one or the other (if you will pardon me) goes extinct. If there are flaws or deficiencies in evolutionary theory, they will not be remedied through hybridizing evolution with Creationism. Any deficiencies in evolutionary theory will only be effectively ameliorated by redefining reality (McGettigan, 2008) through an evolutionary, rather than a Creationistic, lens.

Though pithy and carefully crafted, the argument developed in Science, Evolution, and Creationism is better designed to confirm the convictions of believers than to convert non-believers. In other words, the National Academy of Science is preaching to the choir. Rational compromises are possible only when all parties involved a conflict are committed to achieving rational solutions. Unfortunately, paradigm conflict is rarely rational. What’s more, being right is not necessarily the shortest route to popularity; in fact, it’s usually a recipe for the reverse (check with any classroom Brainiac to confirm this). As I have argued elsewhere (McGettigan, 2008), the means through which beliefs are shaped–and hearts and minds are won–often has more to do with power than truth. Evolution may never win a popularity contest, but it will persevere by doing precisely what it does best: finding better, more convincing ways to explain life, the universe, and everything through a scientific lens. If that rubs Creationists the wrong way, then so be it.

May the fittest paradigm survive.

References

Bellomo, Michael, 2006. The Stem Cell Divide: The Facts, the Fiction, and the Fear Driving the Greatest Scientific, Political, and Religious Debate of Our Time. New York: AMACOM.

Davis, Percival and Dean H. Kenyon, 1989. Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins. Richardson, Texas: Foundation for Thought and Ethics.

Goodstein, Laurie, 2005, “Teaching of Creationism Is Endorsed in New Survey.” New York Times, August 31, 2005.http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/31/national/31religion.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Hawking, Stephen W., 2007. The Theory of Everything: The Origin and Fate of the Universe. New York: Phoenix Books.

Keeter, Scott, 2005. “What’s Not Evolving Is Public Opinion.” Washington Post, Sunday, October 2, 2005.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/30/AR2005093002083_pf.html

McGettigan, Timothy, 2008. “Anomaly Overload: An Evolutionary Theory of Truth.” Theory & Science, 10 (1).

Monastersky, Richard, 2006, “On the Front Lines in the War Over Evolution,” Chronicle of Higher Education, March 10, 2006.http://chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i27/27a01401.htm

National Academies of Science, Institute of Medicine, 2008. Science, Evolution, and Creationism. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Simon, Stephanie, 2008, “Evolution’s Critics Shift Tactics With Schools: Pressure Hits States For Education Bills; A National Push.” Wall Street Journal, May 2, 2008; Page A10.  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120967537476060561.html

I very much enjoyed the money book. Your explanation of economics is refreshingly clear. The concepts you present are particularly important now, since the corporate media are avoiding any critical analysis of the basic assumptions underlying the economic system and any consideration of alternative systems and are focusing instead on the elite insider debate over superficial reforms. Your book is also important now because many new-age folks don’t know much about economics and accept capitalism as a given. The current crisis has challenged their complacency, and your analysis will help them rethink their assumptions within a spiritual context.

A grounded and revealing analysis of the nature, function, and the social, political, and economic costs of debtRemoves the black box, obtuse jargon, and complicated science to  reveal the ugly realities of capitalist economics that lie within. A personal, critical, and perfectly executed  introduction to the realities of capitalist  economics.

Download Free Sample

Summer Snow - A peace novel

A perfect book for any critical social science class or humanities class. Hathaway skillfully weaves multiple issues into an engaging tapestry of enlightenment. Published by Avatar Publications

[amazonify]097384423X:right[/amazonify]In an era of constant war and aggression, William T. Hathaway provides a peaceful breath of air.  An awesome book for any social science educator wanting to present a fresh and alternative view to the constant media hype about war, democracy, aggression, and patriarchy.

Download Free Sample
Purchase from Lightning Path Press
or Amazon.com (see box)

What Happens When a Society Succumbs to the Mass Insanity of Warfare?

SUMMER SNOW is a peace novel set amidst the war on terrorism as a US warrior falls in love with a Sufi Muslim and learns from her an alternative to the military mentality. While Special Forces battle al-Qaeda, the escalating violence threatens their future together and the lives of thousands. To save them, the Sufis use ancient techniques designed to bring peace to the collective consciousness and end war. But can they make them work in time?

A tale of love in the shadow of destruction, SUMMER SNOW blends romance, adventure, and mystic wisdom to communicate its theme that higher consciousness is more effective than violence and that women may be more able than men to lead us there.

The book also portrays how patriarchal machismo causes war and other social pathologies. “Understanding the effects that our culturally imposed gender roles have on us is crucial to understanding why we go to war,” author William T. Hathaway states. “One attraction of war is that it is a substitute for eroticism; it is the ultimate sexual perversion. It also reduces our ability to love. Our society has degraded masculinity into a deadly toxin. It’s poisoned us all. Men have to confront this part of themselves before men and women together can heal it.”

In writing SUMMER SNOW, Hathaway drew on his experiences during a year and a half in Central Asia.

A former Special Forces officer turned peace writer and activist, he is also the author of A WORLD OF HURT (Rinehart Foundation Award), CD-RING, and RADICAL PEACE: People Refusing War. He wrote the screenplay for SOCRATES, an educational film starring Ed Asner that was broadcast on PBS. A selection of his writing is available at www.peacewriter.org.

The first three chapters are reprinted at http://www.shattercolors.com/fiction/hathaway_summersnow01.htm.

SUMMER SNOW is published by Avatar Publications.

Through the medium of kinship, early humans developed cooperative arrangements that, according to Marshal Sahlins, were apparently mandated by virtue of the conditions of life. In his words, “The emerging human primate, in a life-and-death-struggle economic struggle with nature, could not afford the luxury of a social struggle. Co-operation, not competition, was essential…. Hobbe’s famous fantasy of a war of ‘all against all’ in the natural state could not be further from the truth.” (Sahlins quoted in Kohn, 35).

First published in 1986, Alfie Kohn’s book No Contest: The Case Against Competition provides a carefully researched and documented antidote to the idolatry of competition that passes for common sense in our Western societies. In this 324 page book Kohn painstakingly takes on, and dismisses, all the cherished myths of competition that make our modern nations go round.

Is competition inevitable?

Is competition a part of human nature?

Yes say the pundits but no, says Kohn. In fact, says Kohn, proponents of competition who argue that competition is inherent in nature often ignore evidence to the contrary (i.e. that nature is far more co-operative), conflate biological definitions of competition (i.e. natural selection) with the human practice of competition, and even use deceptive rhetorical twists, drawing erroneous and faulty conclusions, just to prove their point. Maybe so, say the proponents, but competition certainly increase productivity, excellence, and creativity! But not so, says Kohn. In fact, contrary to what most people believe, research indicates that competition undermines performance, reduces creativity, and lowers productivity .

In one study, seven to eleven year old girls were asked to make “silly” collages, some competing for prizes and some not. Seven artists then independently rated their works on each of 23 dimensions. The result: “Those children who competed for prizes made collages that were significantly less creative than those made by children in the control group.” Children in the less competitive condition produced works thought to be less spontaneous, less complex, and less varied (Kohn, 54).

[amazonify]0395631254:right[/amazonify]

But competition is fun. You can’t have fun unless you are beating somebody down!

But uh uh! Research clearly shows that when given a choice between a competitive “beat the other person down” game, and a game that requires cooperative interaction (and where there are no “losers”) children not already socialized to worship competition prefer not to compete.

But competition builds character!

But competition is a fact of nature!

But people who don’t like competition are sissies, weaklings, and losers.

But…

But…

But…

By the end of the book all the myths have been laid to rest and one is left with the uncomfortable conclusion that the worship of competition, which reaches its frenzied peak in the spectacles of Olympic gladiatorial predation we are forced to endure every two years, is at best a bunch of ideological hookum, and at worst the sign of a political and economic system built upon a psychological pathology.

What’s that you say?

Competition is the sign of psychological dysfunction?

…ours heroes (entrepreneurs and athletes, movie stars and politician) may be motivated by low self esteem…. our “state religion” is a sign of psychological ill health. (Kohn, 103)

…most of these …people will agree there is something amiss with the fellow who cannot walk into a room without wondering whether he is the strongest or wealthiest. (Kohn, 103)

It might sound outrageous to some, but after reading the book you realize it is a fair statement and should be at least open to consideration and discussion, especially when you realize that there is almost no evidence to support the idea that competition is either natural, beneficial, or inevitable, and particularly when we you see the lengths to which supporters of competition will go to bolster an otherwise weak and ridiculous argument. When even smart academics dissemble and confabulate you have to ask, what the heck is wrong with them. Indeed, what is wrong with us all. Kohn suggests, reasonably, that it is an issue of self-esteem. People are driven to compete, he says, simply because it is a way to feel good about themselves. It makes sense when you think about it. As children we no sooner enter the hallowed halls of learning then we are immediately inserted into a competitive hierarchy where we are made acutely aware of our relative position, and where our place in the hierarchy is constantly re-presented and reinforced by the practice of gold stars and grading. Our children learn right from day one that being better than others is what gets them the love and that anything else is nothing more than the big “L” on the forehead.  And let us be clear, it is not merely about performance but about performing better than others. And if you say that’s not the case, then why not drop the practice of grading children altogether? Why not make everybody feel good about themselves by giving everybody an A and thus eliminating the soul crushing attack on self-esteem, as Canadian history Professor David Noble does in his courses. The evidence is clear, grades undermine creativity, critical thought, and performance, so why bother instituting competition at all?

This book is sure to stir up debate and controversy and would be an excellent book for a class on social movements, an introductory sociology course, a course on gender or ethnicity, and even courses on political economy,  the history of capitalism, or philosophy.  Kohn takes aim at some of the most hallowed icons of our modern competitive societies and brings a refreshing dose of evidence based reasoning to the table. Not for the faint of heart, but perfect for any instructor wishing to raise the hackles of their students and stir up passionate debate and inquiry.

.

There are now a range of academic disciplines which have been indelibly marked by — indeed produced by — the interests and actions of the propagandists. The field of Public Relations research, the discipline of marketing, some aspects of Human Resource Management and Management and Business Studies more generally all bear the mark of propaganda victories by their systemic refusal to face their origins in propaganda. nor have sociology, psychology, and political science dealt with their demons over this. It is an incredible victory for great power that there is no institute for the study of propaganda (in its real meaning) anywhere in the world. Those that remain studying propaganda do so almost entirely from within the authorised framework that this happens largely in war. Let us be clear about this. We do mean that most academics have been ‘persuaded’ and have come to see things in terms conducive to great power. (Miller and Dinan, 2004: 180. Italics in original).

So you think that the Nazi’s wrote the book on propaganda do you? You think we live in a functioning democracy? Well, think again. In this book by sociologists David Miller and William Dinan you will discover the truth about public relations, propaganda, and corporate control over the public mind. And I’ll be honest with you, it is not a pretty truth. Did you know, the Nazi’s learned about brainwashing the masses from British and American public relations experts? Did you know, some of this centuries most successful public relations experts where in bed with the most brutal and infamous dictators and “serial human right’s abusers” of all time? Did you know the term public relations is a drop in replacement for the term propaganda and is considered the solution to the elite’s “problem” with democracy? Did you know, Britain’s PR man Max Clifford openly acknowledges he lies on behalf of his political clients? “I’ve been telling lies on behalf of people, businessmen, politicians and countries for 40 years” he says “…All PROs at all levels lie through their teeth.” A Century of Spin provides a fascinating and well researched look into the world of corporate mind control and corporate spin. Beginning at the turn of the century the authors document, in painstaking detail, propaganda victory after victory as the global mind control experts carefully and successfully crafted a mass mind set suitable and accepting of neoliberal market reforms. By engaging in massive (and expensive) brainwashing campaigns (er, sorry, public relations campaigns) and by socializing the world’s most powerful individuals in secret and highly exclusive private clubs and getaways, the PR masters have made the world safe for autocratic control of labor, resource, and economy.

It may not be a pretty or popular argument, especially amongst those working in the corrupted hallways of PR research, and it might be surprising to people who believe their concentrated corporate media is anything other than an extension of ruling class propaganda and control, but if the well documented and candid look at the world of corporate influence and propaganda is accurate as presented by Miller and Dinan, and if functioning democracy is important to you, then it is certainly worth taking a brave and open minded look at.