Academic sociology has structurally avoided engaging the Holocaust as a disciplinary challenge.

Evidence

When measured against the work done by historians or theologians, the bulk of academic sociology looks more like a collective exercise in forgetting and eye-closing. By and large, the lessons of the Holocaust have left little trace on sociological common sense, which includes among many others such articles of faith as the benefits of reason’s rule over the emotions, the superiority of rationality over (what else?) irrational action, or the endemic clash between the demands of efficiency and the moral leanings with which ‘personal relations’ are so hopelessly infused. — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 64

Categorization

• XREF: Relevant to the Islamophobia field’s critique of mainstream social science’s blind spots — same logic of a discipline’s common sense failing to register its own enabling conditions. — connects to: Normalizing the Holocaust as one genocide among many also defuses its challenge to sociology — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 39; Marginalizing the Holocaust silences its message about modern institutions — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 27; Both dominant readings of the Holocaust leave sociology’s theory of modernity unchallenged — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 42 (+4 more)
• QUESTION: Which specific sociological ‘articles of faith’ — reason over emotion, rationality over irrationality, efficiency vs. morality — does the Holocaust field later challenge in Islamophobia scholarship?

Related

• The Holocaust failed to transform sociology’s self-understanding of modern civilization. (similarity 0.90)
• The Holocaust reveals sociology’s inadequacy more than sociology explains the Holocaust (similarity 0.87)
• All Holocaust scholarship is ultimately a debate over modernity’s self-image. (similarity 0.86)
• Both dominant readings of the Holocaust leave sociology’s theory of modernity unchallenged (similarity 0.86)
• Normalizing the Holocaust as one genocide among many also defuses its challenge to sociology (similarity 0.86)
• The Holocaust must be read as integral to modernity, not as its aberration. (similarity 0.85)
• Sociology mirrored modern society by banishing ethical problematics from its discourse (similarity 0.84)
• The Holocaust question must keep its full weight and horror (similarity 0.83)
• Marginalizing the Holocaust silences its message about modern institutions (similarity 0.83)
• The Holocaust is a product of modern rational society, not a Jewish problem alone (similarity 0.83)
• The Holocaust combined long-festering social tensions with the rational instruments modernity created (similarity 0.83)
• Comprehending the Holocaust requires breaking its own unfamiliar code (similarity 0.82)
• The Holocaust functions as a laboratory test revealing modernity’s hidden capacities. (similarity 0.81)
• Modernity’s institutions actively enabled and supplied the Holocaust (similarity 0.81)
• The Holocaust was a product of modernity, not pre-modern barbarity. (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Marginalizing the Holocaust silences its message about modern institutions #expands (0.85) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 27
• The Holocaust failed to transform sociology’s self-understanding of modern civilization. #corroborates (0.85) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 242
• The Holocaust reveals sociology’s inadequacy more than sociology explains the Holocaust #expands (0.85) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 43
• Normalizing the Holocaust as one genocide among many also defuses its challenge to sociology #complicates (0.80) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 39
• Both dominant readings of the Holocaust leave sociology’s theory of modernity unchallenged #expands (0.80) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 42
• The Holocaust must be read as integral to modernity, not as its aberration. #expands (0.75) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 630