Suicide and the Gamble with Death

Despite the shortcomings and ambiguities in Douglas’s own attempts to analyse the social meanings of suicide, he was quite right to stress the importance of more descriptive material on suicidal actions, communications, etc. 1 This is not to concur with the view that there are on the one hand (legitimate) descriptions of ‘real world’ phenomena and on the other (illegitimate) ‘fictional’ descriptions obtained through predefined ‘scientific’, or bureaucratic, categories; but simply to make the obvious assertion that one understands more about a chosen field of study first, by reading the relevant academic literature and second, if possible, by examining the writings, statements and other communications of those whose behaviour one is seeking to explain. On both these counts most sociologists who have tried to explain suicide, including Durkheim, have a poor track record. 2 Perhaps, like the criminologists castigated by Matza, an overemphasis on cause and correction has impoverished description and appreciation. 3 Whatever the reason, the fact remains that most sociological students of suicide, whether or not they use the official statistics, work with a conception of suicide that does little justice to the complexities and subtleties of the phenomenon.

Assertion · Bureaucracy · Criminology · Epistemology · Field (mathematics) · Phenomenon · Political science · Politics · Reading (process) · Sociology · Computer Science · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Mathematics · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology

• Where The Action Is

  Erving Goffman•Interaction Ritual•2017

  Add to list