No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
The word “moral” gets a social scientist into trouble. A few years ago a colleague of mine strongly advised against my using it in the title of a monograph. On the face of it the term seems to some people unscientific; moreover, it is ambiguous. One has to explain tediously what one means by it. These would seem to be good reasons for avoiding its use altogether. They would be, except that no other word describes what I want to discuss.
It is true of course that the term moral has to do with values. But it has reference to an aspect of human life, and one that can be studied objectively. Religious phenomena have not been thought unworthy of research just because there are strong value elements in them.
1 In his Folkways (New York, 1906), pp. 36–8.Google Scholar
2 Vogt, Evon Z. and O'Dea, Thomas F., “A Comparative Study of the Role of Values in Social Action in Two Southwestern Communities,” American Sociological Review, XVIII, 12, 1953, 645–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Beery, John R., Current Conceptions of Democracy (New York, 1942).Google Scholar
4 White, Ralph K., Value Analysis (Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, 1951).Google Scholar
5 Catton, William R. Jr., “Exploring Techniques for Measuring Human Values,” American Sociological Review, XIX, 02, 1954, 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Morris, CharIes R., The Open Self (New York, 1948), chap. iv.Google Scholar
7 Philadelphia, 1941, chap, xxiii and Appendices.
8 Ogburn, William F. and Grigg, Charles M., “Factors Related to the Virginia Vote on Segregation,” Social Forces, XXXIV, 05, 1956, 301–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 Ann Arbor, 1958, chap. ix.
10 Stouffer, Samuel A., “An Analysis of Conflicting Social Norms,” American Sociological Review, XIV, 12, 1949, 707–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Chicago, 1951; also American Journal of Sociology, July, 1951, Part II.
12 Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang (Glencoe, Ill., 1955).Google Scholar
13 The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison (Princeton, 1958).Google Scholar
14 Schuessler, Karl, “The Deterrent Influence of the Death Penalty,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCLXXXIV, 11, 1954, 54–60.Google Scholar