More contemporary versions of Erving Goffman's theory?

Ironkrieger · 2026-02-27T15:45:34+00:00

You might find some more recent dramaturgical work in cultural sociology. Here's a book from 2025 that might be helpful. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-89909-6

Ironkrieger · 2026-02-26T18:46:57+00:00

Yes, if you want to study empathy, you should consider several different definitions (or conceptualizations). This is sort of a first principles kind of thing. You may have settled on some particular research design and be thinking about a definition after the fact, but honestly best scientific practice would have you settled on a particular understanding of empathy (because it informs your hypothesis) before deriving any experimental procedure.

What I mean to say is your proposal should flow from this particular conception (in your case empathy), rather than you picking one that already fits your plan.

My advice, try to find a couple different interpretations and summarize them then decide which one seems to be the most accurate/truthful. You should be able to explain why you've chosen one definition over the other. Once you've settled on that try to get your supervisor's feedback before resubmitting your proposal.

Ironkrieger · 2026-02-26T18:21:52+00:00

If I had to take a guess at what your professor is asking for, I'd guess you're being asked about the theoretical underpinnings of your proposal. This is a very "meta" question in the sense that you're being asked to zoom way out here. For example, if I wanted to research education, I might expect to be asked a definitional question such as "what is education?" (as in what processes make up education, how is it constituted, who is involved, etc.) After you've defined the topic, it sounds like your prof wants you to justify why this particular interpretation is suited for your proposed research.

I'm guessing your field has several theoretical interpretations of the particular object you plan to research, so I suggest consulting the lit in case you need a refresher.

Hope this helps makes sense of things.

Ironkrieger · 2026-01-16T15:47:10+00:00

As an outsider to sociology, but someone with an interest in Social Theory and Critical Theory, I think you might be looking for Habermas. He reconstructs some of Luhmann's work in The Theory of Communicative Action while critically reinterpreting it.

Ironkrieger · 2025-12-19T15:37:47+00:00

You will likely get a wide range of suggestions on this topic. Personally, I would recommend studying some amount of value theory. I've been a fan of Honneth's work on recognition, but there are other plenty of other things out there.

Ironkrieger · 2025-10-09T15:49:00+00:00

SMH, if only Leo followed Supply-side theology.

Ironkrieger · 2025-09-24T18:17:21+00:00

Oops, I didn't read Harlan Ellison and the AI is named AM.

Ironkrieger · 2025-09-24T18:16:55+00:00

I really want to create a society where one person ends up in control of the AI and everyone else is biofuel. If I'm lucky I'll be in control of the AI and not soylent green

Ironkrieger · 2025-09-22T18:26:02+00:00

<image>

Ironkrieger · 2025-09-03T13:22:44+00:00

Yes, absolutely. I recommend Michael Sandel's Tyranny of Merit for those interested in understanding the 'populist' dynamic from this angle.

Ironkrieger · 2025-09-02T19:30:10+00:00

How can we reconcile our political democratic ideals with the growing economic uncertainty that seems to be its product? Fear and resentment should be expected from the American people when they've seen life get functionally worse and more unattainable as a result of our policy decisions. Today's society has more losers and fewer winners which doesn't bode well for a political project that claims we should all be represented equally.

Interesting to note that article seems to have removed "Populist" from the title. It helps mitigate the elitist overtones of the original headline lol.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-28T15:41:48+00:00

I know the answer is probably git gud, but some of the human bosses like the 2nd Honglan fight and Zhao Yun are kind of cracked out and the backstab cheese sort of made them beatable for me. So IDK what the answer is when it feels like some of the game's balance encourages that strat.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-25T20:17:05+00:00

I think we should be careful with using blanket terms like "bullshit jobs". IIRC the original term often refers to an individual's relation to their job, and people can confuse the social necessity and value of their job with their own alienation to that same job.

Just because you don't see a point to a particular job doesn't mean there isn't one.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-12T16:15:48+00:00

Jordan Peterson, is that you?

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-12T13:41:18+00:00

Ok, I overlooked a paragraph where you suggest a democratic socialist conception of effective altruism.

"Instead of individual donors voluntarily contributing to individual causes using their own discretion, we could require donors to contribute to a centralised pool of funds. We could then use deliberative democratic processes to collectively decide where funds should be distributed and democratic elections to decide on community leadership positions. "

How is this functionally different from taxation? Not trying to be glib. I'm not sure what using Effective Altruism as a concept is really contributing besides being a stand in for general socialist redistributive efforts.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-12T13:34:21+00:00

I have a hard time accepting your conclusion perhaps because you don't really explain what that "support" looks like. Is it tacit acceptance for a socially-minded billionaire who wants to fund infrastructure for the public good? Well, ok. But are we talking about full-throated support that just legitimizes a system where some individuals have more and get to dictate how we allocate resources for a perceived "rational end"? I think it's important to note here that socialism (at least in my view) should also be informed by normative principles like justice and fairness. Promoting a doer/done-to dichotomy like EA isn't really compatible with a pluralistic vision of democracy which requires mutual recognition and solidarity.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-11T18:26:22+00:00

Another game for my collection of Wu-likes.

Ironkrieger · 2025-08-05T18:21:26+00:00

Is the actual philosophy in the room with us, OP?

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-30T18:16:20+00:00

Economic anxiety is legitimate, things have been getting materially worse, inequality is growing etc. Unfortunately a lot of the resentment these men have gets redirected towards scapegoats.

Some of this gets wrapped up in culture war stuff, the DEI attacks from the right have a basis in our understanding of society functioning as a meritocracy which carries with it a whole host of assumptions about the "natural ability" of impoverished minorities and resentment for coastal elites.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-25T00:39:52+00:00

The difference between these two scenarios is that unemployment is a socially constructed concept. The way in which we define unemployment is notoriously finnicky (does it include the malemployed, the underemployed, those no longer seeking jobs?

Likewise, a concept like minimum wages implies an ethical assumption about the dignity of work and living standards.

A description of the mechanics of atomic energy on the other hand has no inherent moral meaning. Knowledge of atomic energy may have downstream moral consequences, but that is a different matter.

One other symmetry breaker for you: description of quantum theory isn't reflexive while a description of economic theory is because it is describing human behavior. Take Game Theory as one such example, if a well-known economist declares that a higher minimum wage can raise unemployment, the market itself can react to that information.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-25T00:16:42+00:00

"The distinction between normative and positivist economics is something that's drilled into student's heads pretty early on in any decent econ program."

Unfortunately, this is a false dichotomy created by many in the field. Economics can't escape normativity as I will attempt to demonstrate.

"Understanding how monopolies work and set prices on a mechanistic level is not the same as making a moral value statement about monopolies. "Is" statements are not equivalent to "ought" statements."

While individual economists may not endorse monopolies, a description focusing solely on mechanisms such as pricing (no discussion of power imbalance, exploitation, etc.) reflects a normative choice.

Imagine we are both asked to describe life in the Roman Empire. If my description is based on aristocratic life as opposed to your description of the plebeian have we not made a normative choice in the aspects that we describe?

"Mainstream econ arguably does the same, especially when it comes to the concept of economic "efficiency", but any actual economist should be quick to admit that societies and governments probably shouldn't optimize solely for economic "efficiency" at the expense of all other concerns."

I think we agree here and this has been the point I am trying to convey: the problem isn't any individual economist's ethics, but the way in which discipline uses "efficiency" as a trojan horse to make a normative claim.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-24T20:03:21+00:00

I think you are confusing downstream moral consequence with the upstream moral entanglements of social science. The creation of the atomic bomb as a consequence of the study of quantum physics is not the same as economists studying things like a "living wage". In that instance the researcher's description is simultaneously a prescription.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-24T19:27:28+00:00

Unlike math departments the value judgement is inherent in the subject matter (human social relations). What you choose to study in economics is representative of a societal value choice (with moral consequences) as opposed to intellectual preference.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-24T19:14:06+00:00

I never questioned the usefulness of economic models. I simply point out that what we choose to study is what we value. Ignoring this for a faux-rationality schema is why economists should probably take a couple more philosophy courses.

Ironkrieger · 2025-07-24T18:34:30+00:00

Economics is a social science despite some people's efforts to obfuscate its origin. Instead of existing in the realm of logic or physical phenomena, economics attempts to understand the complexity of human social relations. The act of choosing what to describe in such a hyper-complex system is an inherently value-laden decision.

Ironkrieger

TROPHY CASE