ABSTRACT
American sociologists like to describe roles as the “dynamic aspect of positions”; it would probably be better to describe them as what lends substance to the empty form of social positions. It has been widely observed in German universities that students of working-class origin are the most inclined to join dueling fraternities. A young man’s parents may vote for a radical party, but in his new social stratum he votes conservative. Janoska-Bendl is right in her assumption that a view of this kind involves an irreconcilable antinomy. A proof and at the same time a further illustration of this thesis may be found in the fact that definitions of disciplines with identical names—among them sociology, psychology, and social policy—vary considerably from country to country. The formulation is unfortunate because a mere “calculation” does not suffice to justify a reliance on “unrealistic” assumptions.
