Sociology and moral character: Diagnostic, agnostic, or gnostic?

This article suggests three orientations within sociology toward issues of morality and character development. The first stems from Durkheim, one where sociological tools diagnose the operation of any society and its constituent parts, including typifications of the individual. This tradition holds that sociologists can help diagnose society-specific problems and failings and participate in addressing them. The second is Weberian, the notion that sociologists need to be value-neutral in their science. This approach is more agnostic in terms of prescribing fixes to social structures and attempts a more dispassionate analysis of social systems. The third traces to some origins of the field highlighting moral injustices in contemporary society, holding that there is, in fact, a 'right' way to understand human character and potential. Some adherents of this echo ancient gnostic proclamations of holding true insight into the nature of natural and social life, while other, more DuBois-ian strands represent fundamental challenges to existing power structures. Ultimately, the paper concludes that sociological insight is vital for fully contextualizing the forces shaping the teaching, enactment, and consequences of moral character, but the author is less clear about which Ideal Type best captures the discipline's potential.