I would second your claim that way too often "what passes as theory is not theory at all but social philosophy with a heavy dose of political ideology". Even in highly ranked quantitative programs (in Germany, other European countries, the US) I found both professors and grad students making normative statements as if they were scientific statements. The same people usually cannot explain what they classify as theory and what not or what differentiates a "good" or useful theory from a "bad" or not so useful theory. I feel we need more philosophy of science and methodology classes in sociology grad programs. Or maybe a mandatory RC28 conference participation. ;) What would your cure look like?

In my opinion, the best test of a theory is its usefulness. As an applied sociologist and public health specialist, I have applied a number of health behavioral theories and the ecological model. My most recent work attempts to apply Link and Phalen's Fundamental Cause Theory to guide the transition of my expertise in conducting research at the individual level to a community-level research study of HIV/AIDS among migrant workers.

Fundamental Cause Theory suggests that interventions to improve health should address the risk factors for disease, i.e., the distal factors that link socioeconomic status (disadvantaged migrant workers) to disease conditions, such as HIV and AIDS. Further, they argue that the proximal (behavioral or individual level) risk factors need to be contexualized in order to focus on the structural or distal conditions in which individuals are exposed to HIV risks. This investigation is guided by the proposition that distal factors that link socioeconomic status to disease (HIV/AIDS) are structural level (access to prevention, care and treatment, social networks, social support). These factors are the contexts in which the individual level risk factors (alcohol use and sexual

risk behaviors) have been shown in our previous work to be associated with HIV risk factors. The proposed research study will implement a structural intervention to improve access to HIV prevention, care, and treatment in the Marion E. Fether Clinic (MEFC). Further, Amigos Hacen Cambios, the proposed structural level intervention, will assess migrant social networks for inclusion of newly arriving migrants (Newcomers) and

migrants who have lived in the community for five or more years (Long-timers) in order to take advantage of their strengths. Newcomers, in Immokalee, bring a higher health status and less risky sexual behaviors to the community, while Long-timers have been found to have greater access to primary care (McCoy, Shehadeh, Rubens, & Navarro, 2013; McCoy, Williams, & Atkins, 2012). The heterogeneity of the networks increases the probability of diffusion of the innovation or new ideas (using the MEFC or reducing alcohol use) (Jolly, & Wiley 2013).

I have not had the opportunity to test this proposal, but I think it is possible.