ABSTRACT
Although the title and introduction of Terry Johnson’s critique of Goldthorpe raise the problems of both ‘ideology’ and ‘action’, he concentrates almost exclusively on a single issue: the way in which social action is treated by Goldthorpe both theoretically and empirically. By connecting the problem of action with the issue of ideological positions, Johnson seems to imply that certain methodological or theoretical practices have necessary connections with political or ideological orientations. If, as he tries to show, Goldthorpe does not succeed in transforming his action theory sufficiently into research practice, then Goldthorpe—Johnson seems to suggest—can also not be the proper socialist he claims to be.
