Abstract

The paper develops a comment on the types of sociologies recently proposed by Boudon, Goldthorpe and Burawoy. While the author takes a general position in favour of the approach proposed by Goldthorpe, his attention is drawn on the more problematic but also more interesting typology proposed by Burawoy. The argument is developed around the problem of control of sociological propositions as scientific propositions. The idea that public sociology needs professional sociology to strengthen its scientific character is criticised because of the danger of producing ideology. The relation between facts and values is approached in a Weberian way where a distinction is drawn between the need of staying away from value judgements in the analysis of facts, and the need to share an ethic of doubt as the specific deontology of scientists.