Adorno and Empirical Sociology

[filipe ceppas]

> Sociology is a discipline, by the way, where just about everyone in the
> discipline thinks the discipline is too narrow, not interdisciplinary
> enough ect.  But, of course, it is the most pluralistic of the social
> sciences theoretical, with the possible exception of anthropology.

What can we say about literary criticism or metahistory debates? I don't
think this comparison usefull at all. May you could argue more about it. I
think that the importance of this issue as part of the discussion about
"Adorno's contribuition to sociology", could be linked to the critic of
clear disciplinary borders when we are thinking about, *and doing*
sociological research (and the same goes for anthropology, literary
criticism, metahistory debate, etc.). Don't you think so?