No sociologist was more concerned with morality and the interrelation between morality and society than Émile Durkheim; and at least sociological approaches to understand morality can be expected to clarify whether and to what extent they are willing to follow Durkheim's account.

The issue of Nietzsche's influence on Weber's cultural criticism remains controversial. While it is generally accepted that Nietzsche's criticism of Western culture provided Weber with an underlying problematic of cultural crisis and meaninglessness, I wish to argue that Nietzsche had a more extensive and important impact on Weber than is usually acknowledged. Weber's practical and theoretical treatment of the ‘empirical sciences of action’, namely, sociology and history, involves a profound reaction to Nietzsche. This becomes evident in his general conceptualizations of knowledge and science, but more specifically in his ideal-type methodology, his approach to action through tensions between life in this world and received interpretative structures, as well as in the substance of his ideal-types of rational action.

The constitutions of the last two centuries are monuments to an eminently modern enterprise: the reconstruction of the political order by rational human effort. Constitution-making is a deliberate attempt at institution-building at the fundamental level of laying down the normative and legal foundations of the political order. Framing a constitution always purports to be an act of foundation; an act intended to break with the past, and with the existing cultural and institutional traditions, in which principled discussions take the place of everyday horse-trading in politics.

This article draws on participant observation and casematerial on significant situations and individuals, who live in a small neighbourhood of central Naples. I shall call this neighbourhood ‘the quartiere’, after local custom. The issues discussed here can reasonably be said to have wider significance, because the old centre is basically sociologically homogeneous. This large part of the city is not, however, socially undifferentiated, as many observers seem to have assumed. In agreement with this pattern, both bourgeois and, in large majority, popolino live in the quartiere, often residing in the same building. Given the graduality of socio-economic positions among local people, I have deliberately decided to use very general terms, such as ‘popolino’ and ‘bourgeois’, in describing my informants.

This study analyzes a major shift in the Israeli discourse of generalized exchange as reflected in key role models and images of social involvement, voluntarism and public good provision. It highlights the progressive decline of the image of the pioneer or ‘halutz’ and the parallel emergence of the image of the ‘freier’, a vernacular model of a sucker, as a meta-comment on the pioneer model and on Israeli existence in general (2).

The focus of this paper is adoption, specifically adoption as an issue of local justice. Local justice, as conceived by Jon Elster, is a way of thinking about how scarce goods and burdens are allocated by local, low-level institutions; and encompasses such issues as military service, college admission, organs for transplantation, donation of sperm, child custody, and adoption. There are three principle elements to local justice: scarce goods, institutions that allocate them, and the individuals who step forward as allocative candidates. Over time, the individual will bring his or her needs before a succession of institutional providers, while the institutions will find before them a succession of individuals who need, want, or merit the scarce good being allocated. In many instances, such as the allocation of organs for transplantation, allocation may be a matter of life or death; while in other instances, the consequences of not receiving the good may not be life threatening, but nonetheless affect an individual's future life plans (e.g. admittance into Harvard). Thus allocative decisions can be evaluated according to their importance along two different axes. The first contains decisions which are ‘important’ because they involve life and death outcomes, such as the allocation of kidneys, while other decisions are ‘important’ not because they carry with them life-and-death outcomes, but because they influence the lives of a vast number of individuals. Selection choices for college admission are among this latter type of important decision.

It is A well-established fact that families vary quite widely in their educational practices. In the past twenty years a certain number of studies on socialization have revealed a clear relation between the socioeconomic status of the parents and their educational style. Kohn (1977), for example, has shown that the emphasis parents put on discipline and immediate conformity is more pronounced in lower-class groups, whereas middle class groups value more the internalization of instructions and the development of personal motivations. In the same vein, psychologists and social psychologists have observed that the ‘authoritarian’ style of parent-child relationship (consisting of strong control and weak support) prevails more often in lower-class groups than in middle class groups, the latter being more prone to exercise strong support combined with marked control in their child's education (Bronfenbrenner 1958). Family sociologists have produced quite exhaustive articles covering the literature in this field (Gecas 1979; Peterson and Rollins 1987).

The upheavals in the Eastern European countries have demonstrated to the social sciences in a painful manner that they do not dispose of any adequate theory suited to grasp the dynamics and scope of the processes taking place there. Western sociology has won its categories from analysing Western societies and, in a premature manner, come to a generalised concept of society as such. Absorbed by the problems of advanced capitalism, it was not prepared for the collapse of the Easterns systems. Exploring socialist societies has, until recently, pre-eminently been a topic of specialised disciplines, such as Eastern European Studies, Soviet Studies, the Theory of International Relations, Comparative Economics and Development Studies. Its theory-building has remained too closely tied to pre-defined questions, to official documents, uncertain and precarious data or to ideological givens, to be able to assess realistically the developmental dynamics of Eastern societies. The exchange of information between Eastern and Western scholars has been highly selective, hence seldom resulting in mutual fertilisation.

Almost a decade after the wave of transformations from authoritarian to democratic regimes started in Latin America, Eastern European countries, one after another, entered the path leading towards democracy. The end of 1989 and the first part of 1990 saw unheard of numbers of free elections in ten Latin American and all East European countries (with the exception of Poland, where freedom of the first election was limited). Moreover, all the newly elected rulers won office on a promise to liberalise their economies. However, many commentators and scholars fear the impact on populations of painful structural reform policies and predict that new democracies in both regions either will not stay democratic for long or will not carry out a full package of economic reforms. They predict that half-hearted efforts at stabilisation will be followed by overwhelming political resistance which will provoke a reversal of economic policies. Each failure will reduce the credibility of successive reform attempts, the ultimate consequence being not merely economic disarray but an almost total loss of faith in democratic political institutions.