This article reviews the construct and measurement of materialism and concludes that materialism is appropriately conceptualized as a consumer value. The development of a values-oriented materialism scale with three components—acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success—is described. In validation tests high scorers (compared with low scorers) desired a higher level of income, placed greater emphasis on financial security and less on interpersonal relationships, preferred to spend more on themselves and less on others, engaged in fewer voluntary simplicity behaviors, and were less satisfied with their lives.

A Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and Its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation

Sociological studies sensitive to the issue of place are rarely labeled thus, and at the same time there are far too many of them to fit in this review. It may be a good thing that this research is seldom gathered up as a “sociology of place,” for that could ghettoize the subject as something of interest only to geographers, architects, or environmental historians. The point of this review is to indicate that sociologists have a stake in place no matter what they analyze, or how: The works cited below emplace inequality, difference, power, politics, interaction, community, social movements, deviance, crime, life course, science, identity, memory, history. After a prologue of definitions and methodological ruminations, I ask: How do places come to be the way they are, and how do places matter for social practices and historical change?

A Space for Place in Sociology

The relevance of materialism to consumer behavior is discussed. Materialism is advanced as a critical but neglected macro consumer-behavior issue. Measures for materialism and three subtraits—envy, nongenerosity, and possessiveness—are presented and tested. The subtraits are compared over three generations of consumers from the same families, and measure validity is further explored via responses to a sentence completion task. Based on these results, a call is made for research into related macro consumer-behavior issues.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/254373.pdf

Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Material World

BRUNO LATOUR, The pasteurization of France, trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law, Cambridge, Mass., and London, Harvard University Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. 273, £23.95. GEORGES CANGUILHEM, Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences, trans. Arthur Goldhammer, Cambridge, Mass., and London, The MIT Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. xi, 160, £17.95. Bruno Latour has written a wonderfully funny book about himself. It is difficult, however, to summarize a text committed to the view that \"Nothing is, by itself, either reducible or irreducible to anything else\", (p. 158). In Latour's opinion, the common view that sociologists of knowledge and scientists are opposed is incorrect. Both groups, according to Latour, are the authors of identical mistakes: reductionism and, relatedly, attempting to conjoin (in the instance of the sociologist) science and society, or (in the instance of the scientist) keeping them apart. For Latour, there are only forces or resistances which different groups encounter and attempt to conquer by forming alliances. These groups, however, are not simply the actors of conventional sociology. They include, for example, microbes, the discovery of the Pasteurians, with which they have populated our world and which we must now take notice of in any encounter or war in which we engage. War is a fundamental metaphor for Latour, since in a war or a battle clashes of armies are later called the \"victory\" of a Napoleon or a Kutuzov. Likewise, he argues, the Pasteurization of France can be viewed as a battle, with its field and its myriad contestants, in which opposing sides attempted to mould and coerce various forces of resistance. Strangely, he points out, the outcome of this huge battle, the labour and struggle of these masses, we attribute to the scientific genius of Pasteur. Pasteur's genius, however, says Latour, lay not in science (for this could be yet another way of making science and society distinct) but as strategist. Pasteur was able to cross disciplinary lines, recruiting allies to laboratory science by persuading them that they were recruiting him. This was possible because, like the armies in battle, they had already done the work of the general. Thus Pasteur's microbiology, which might conventionally be seen as a whole new science, can also be construed as a brilliant reformulation of all that preceded it and made it possible. Hygienists seized on the work of the Pasteurians and the two rapidly became powerful allies because \"The time that they [the hygienists] had made was now working for them\" (p. 52). French physicians, on the other hand, resisted recruitment, since for them it meant enslavement. Finally, however, they recruited the Pasteurians to their enterprise. Pasteurian public health was turned into a triumph of medicine. It is impossible to read this book and not substitute Latour for Pasteur. At the head of his own army, increasingly enlarged by the recruitment of allies, Latour now presents us, in his own language, with something we have made, or at least made possible. The cynic might say, using the old jibe against sociologists, that Latour has explained to us in his own language everything we knew anyway. Retorting thus, however, would be to unselfconsciously make an ally of Latour and miss the point by a narrow margin that might as well be a million miles. Latour says all this much more clearly (and certainly more wittily) than any review. Read it, but beware; in spite of Latour's strictures about irreducibility, the text is not what it seems. This is a recruitment brochure: Bruno needs you. Among the many historians whom Latour convicts by quotation of mistaking the general for the army, Pasteur for all the forces at work in French society, is Georges Canguilhem. Latour uses two quotes from Canguilhem, both taken from the original French version of Ideology and rationality in the life sciences, first published in 1977. Reading Canguilhem after Latour induces a feeling akin to culture shock. Astonishingly, Canguilhem seems almost Anglo-American. Anyone familiar with Canguilhem's epistemological universe would hardly be surprised to discover that Latour finds in it perspectives different from his own. After all, Canguilhem remains committed to the epistemologically distinct entity science or, better still, sciences. Likewise he employs distinctions between science and ideology, as in Spencerian ideology and Darwinian science, which will seem familiar, possibly jaded to English-reading eyes. His text is liberally seeded with unLatourian expressions, including injunctions to distinguish \"between ideology and science\" (p. 39), lamentations that eighteenth-century medicine \"squandered its energy in the erection of systems\" (p. 53), rejoicing that physiology \"liberated itself' from classical anatomy (p. 54), and regret that \"Stahl's influence ... seriously impeded experimental

/pdf/bruno-latour-the-pasteurization-of-france-trans-alan-syp9mg0jqd.pdf

Bruno Latour, The pasteurization of France , trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law, Cambridge, Mass., and London, Harvard University Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. 273, £23.95. - Georges Canguilhem, Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences , trans. Arthur Goldhammer, Cambridge, Mass., and London, The MIT Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. xi, 160, £17.95.

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed

From Graven Images: Patterns of Modern Materialism

Architecture, Power, and National Identity.

When the National Science Foundation funds research about the earth's crust and the Department of Energy supports studies on the disposal of nuclear wastes, what do they expect for their money? Most scientists believe that in such cases the government wants information for immediate use or directions for seeking future benefits from nature. Challenging this oversimplified view, Chandra Mukerji depicts a more complex interdependence between science and the state. She uses vivid examples from the heavily funded field of oceanography, particularly from recent work on seafloor hot springs and on ocean disposal of nuclear wastes, to raise questions about science as it is practiced and financed today. She finds that scientists act less as purveyors of knowledge to the government than as an elite and highly skilled talent pool retained to give legitimacy to U.S. policies and programs: scientists allow their authority to be projected onto government officials who use scientific ideas for political purposes. Writing in a crisp and jargon-free style, Mukerji reveals the peculiar mix of autonomy and dependency defined for researchers after World War II--a mix that has changed since then but that continues to shape the practical conduct of science. Scientists use their control over the scientific content of research to convince themselves of their autonomy and to achieve some power in their dealings with funding agencies, but they remain fundamentally dependent on the state. Mukerji argues that they constitute a kind of reserve force, like the Army or Navy reserves, paid by the government to do research only because science is politically essential to the workings of the modern state. This book isessential reading not only for sociologists and students of science and society, and for oceanographers, but also for every scientist whose work depends directly or indirectly on government support.

A Fragile Power: Scientists and the State

List of illustrations Acknowledgements Glossary of French terms 1. The culture of land and the territorial state 2. Military ambitions and territorial gardens 3. Material innovation and cultural identity 4. Techniques of material mobilization 5. Social choreography and the politics of place 6. Naturalizing power in the new state 7. A history of material power Notes References Index.

Territorial ambitions and the gardens of Versailles

Illustrations ix Acknowledgments xiii Abbreviations xvii Introduction xix Chapter 1: Impossible Engineering 1 Chapter 2: Territorial Politics 15 Chapter 3: Epistemic Credibility 36 Chapter 4: New Rome Confronts Old Gaul 60 Chapter 5: Shifting Sands 91 Chapter 6: The New Romans 117 Chapter 7: Thinking Like a King 154 Chapter 8: Monumental Achievement 176 Chapter 9: Powers of Impersonal Rule 203 Notes 229 Bibliography 277 Index 293

https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/aestimatio/article/download/25939/19078

Chandra Mukerji

Papers

From Graven Images: Patterns of Modern Materialism

Architecture, Power, and National Identity.

A Fragile Power: Scientists and the State

Territorial ambitions and the gardens of Versailles

Impossible Engineering: Technology and Territoriality on the Canal du Midi