I have always thought that the achievement of cosmopolis depends upon the integration, not just of theology, but of the arts and sciences more generally. Having taught at a liberal arts college for many years, I have connected this with the kind of integration idealistically proposed in theories of liberal education. I have also thought a good bit about the functional integration of sociology. Some of the people who worry about the fragmentation of sociology point to the more than forty-five sections in the American Sociological Association as evidence for this. I argue that what Lonergan calls "field specialization" and "subject specialization" might be evidence for wide diversity of interests, if not for the lamented "fragmentation." But I also believe that functional specialization holds out the possibility for integration.
1.
Field specialization is the basis for many of the sections of the American Sociological Association, and for many of the substantive courses in sociology departments – the sociologies of family, religion, education, and medicine, for example.
2.
Subject specialization is expressed in the differences between disciplines or departments in a college or university. Anthropology, economics, history, linguistics, political science, and sociology are usually in different departments and have different journals and professional associations.
3.
Functional specialization is an emphasis upon one of the different activities we engage in, and the functional specialties are very similar as we go from one field specialty or one subject specialty to another.
Sociologists are most familiar with research methods and theory as functional specialties within sociology. Lonergan's description of functional specialities in theology suggest similar functional specialties in sociology.
(1) research: For sociology, I suggest that this is what we often call "data construction."
(2) interpretation: In sociology, interpretation is necessary in both qualitative and quantitative studies.
(3) history: Sociologists need to be aware of the histories of the institutions that are the objects of their inquiries, as well as the histories of the intellectual tools they use in the conduct of these inquiries.
(4) dialectic: Lonergan's distinction between positions and counter-positions provides explanations for the social conflicts sociologists study, and for the disciplinary conflicts about how to conduct our inquiries. Levine, Donald N.Levine has described the dialectical relationships among sociological schools of thought in his 1995 book,
Visions of the Sociological Tradition(5) foundations: Alvin Gouldner in
The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology called upon sociologists to become more aware of their "domain assumptions." The popularity of the notion of "paradigms" has alerted sociologists to the existences of different foundational beliefs. The difference between this specialty and dialectic is that in the focus on foundations, the inquirer is explaining his or her own commitments, rather than describing in a more non-committal way the different foundational beliefs embraced by others.
(6) doctrines: This name for a functional specialty seems more appropriate for Catholic theologians than for sociologists, since we do not have revealed sociological truths, or popes and councils that can provide authoritative interpretations of revealed truths. I have thought of calling this "hypothesis testing," but that seems pretty far reomoved from what I understand Lonergan to mean by "doctrines." Also, in all of the previous functional specialties, the process of formulating tentative hypotheses and then testing them seems to be involved.
(7) systematics: This corresponds very closely to the sociological specialty of higher-level theory construction. There has been a distinction in sociology between "grand theories" and "theories of the middle-range." Both seem to me to correspond to systematics.
(

communication. Previously, this was (somewhat contemptuously) called "popularization." In recent years, there have been concerted efforts to establish "public sociology" as a respected specialization in the discipline. The aim is to make the findings of sociology more generally available to non-sociologists.
I mention this because I believe in ecumenical dialogue, not just between people with different religious convictions, but also between people in different disciplines. I have always marvelled at the way some educators expect students to integrate what they learn in the different arts and sciences, when the teachers in these disciplines remain so isolated from one another. I will stop here, however, as this post is already too long.