The language of sociology makes morally unsanctioned behavior unspeakable and thus unthinkable

Evidence

In that language, one cannot speak of morality in any other way but in terms of socialization, teaching and learning, systemic prerequisites and societal functions. And, as Wittgenstein reminded us, we can say nothing except what can be said. The form of life sustained by the language of sociology does not contain socially un-sanctioned morality. In that language, nothing that is not socially sanctioned can be talked about as moral. And what one cannot speak of is bound to remain silent. — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 601

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Bauman’s key methodological point: disciplinary language pre-formats what can be thought about morality, drawing on Wittgenstein’s limits-of-language insight.
  • XREF: Directly connects to the later Islamophobia reading toolkit — the same argument about how a discourse’s vocabulary forecloses certain questions reappears in Orientalism’s critique of how the West’s scholarly language configured the Orient. — connects to: Sociology mirrored modern society by banishing ethical problematics from its discourse — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 111; Sociology reduces morality to derivative products of non-moral social institutions — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 481; Orthodox sociology assumes social regulation produces morality and restrains savagery — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 47 (+3 more)

Broader Connections