Working paper No. 275: Does political ideology hinder insights on gender and labor markets?
Stern, C. (2016). Does political ideology hinder insights on gender and labor markets? Ratio Working Paper No. 275. Stockholm: Ratio.
Stern, C. (2016). Does political ideology hinder insights on gender and labor markets? Ratio Working Paper No. 275. Stockholm: Ratio.
Sociology is a field where a large majority of professors lean left. The left-leaning ideology is visible in studies of gender differences in labor markets. In such studies, a left-feminist ideology of equality is taken to be self-evident. Defining equality to equate to slim-outcome difference, however, pre-destines all differences to be seen as outcomes of culturally defined social constructions and discrimination. In this chapter it is hypothesized that this has produced tabooed topics in the field. One such taboo is the acknowledging of differences between men and women. Such differences challenge the left-feminism’s notion of equality in terms of slim-outcome-difference. Research on evolution and preferences is downplayed in favor of cultural explanations. Cultural explanations interpret differences between men and women in labor market behavior as constructed, as largely driven by gender stereotypes and discrimination. The notion that differences can stem from biology or from the choices made by individuals pursuing a lifestyle different than those prescribed by gender researchers is seldom entertained. I hypothesize that the situation stems from gender sociology being dominated by left-feminist ideology.
Stern, C.
2016
Ratio Working Paper
2024
Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue: Freedom is something We Do Together. Lexington Books.
Most sociologists lean left. In surveys and voter-registration studies, the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in American sociology ranges between 59 to 1 and 19.5 to 1 (Klein and Stern 2009; see also Klein and Stern 2006; Duarte et al. 2014). One survey reports more self-identified Marxists (25.5 percent) than self-identified Republicans (5.5 percent) in sociology (Gross and Simmons 2007), and another finds that more sociologists are comfortable with the prospect of working with a Communist colleague than a Republican or a hard-core Christian (Yancey 2011).
More disputed is whether the near monopoly of the left is problematic. Most people would agree that ideological monopoly is a problem if the one-sidedness 1) creates a culture where ideological beliefs are treated as self-evidently true, 2) stunts theorizing and understanding by shunting research into certain ideas or topics, or 3) leads researchers to ignore inconvenient knowledge or plausible alternative explanations.
In this chapter, I argue that all three problems surface in the sociological study of gender differences in the labor market (henceforth sometimes referred to as gender sociology). I also argue that the problems emanate from the particular definition of equality embraced by the left, and thus that the two are causally related to one another and greatly overlap.
2024
Lexington Books.
The motivation for Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue: Freedom is Something We Do Together is based on two observations: first, sociology as a field is populated with scholars on the left and second, (few but still) classical liberals and libertarian scholars are found in neighboring social science fields, such as economics, political science, and political philosophy. Can scholarship benefit if sociology and classical liberal ideas are in dialogue? To answer the question, the book gathers sociologists, criminologists, demographers, and political scientists that care about classical liberal ideas, or are willing to engage their sociological thinking with classical liberal ideas. Not all authors would identify themselves as classical liberals. These contributors discuss sociological topics through the lens of classical liberalism, asking how issues such as class, gender, or race relations can be viewed with a different perspective. Chapters also delve into the intersection of sociology and classical liberalism, exploring where viewpoints conflict and where they align.
2024
Ratio.
Andra upplagan av boken finns tillgänglig i bokhandeln, exempelvis här.
Artificiell intelligens (AI) väcker oro och nyfikenhet. Kommer AI att ta våra jobb? I denna tankeväckande bok tar sig forskaren Magnus Lodefalk an denna fråga – och de många delfrågor som frågan egentligen består utav.
Med hjälp av historiska exempel och dagsaktuell forskning diskuterar Lodefalk vilka jobb som kan försvinna med AI:s intåg, men också vilka typer av jobb som kan uppstå. Vad som skiljer AI från andra teknikers intåg är att den kan användas för att utföra kognitiva arbetsuppgifter. I boken diskuteras därför hur AI generellt sett kan förmodas påverka nästan alla jobb i termer av löneutveckling, produktivitet, kompetenskrav och innehåll.
Det görs genom att dissekera vad AI, och vad jobb, faktiskt är. Redan här kan konstateras att AI kan användas för att ersätta mänskliga förmågor eller för att förstärka desamma – det beror på hur man väljer att utveckla och använda tekniken. Och det, skriver Lodefalk, är i sin tur upp till oss.
I denna bok görs en pedagogisk översyn av forskningsläget gällande AI och arbetsmarknaden. Dessutom innehåller boken konkreta verktyg till dig som vill ha svar på hur AI-exponerat ditt yrke egentligen är.