Search results

Part of the Conference on the State of the Social Sciences held at Boston U, 6-7 Dec 2002. The session focuses on the political inclinations of the social sciences & of social scientists. The issue of politicization has been raised vis-a-vis other disciplines, notably the natural sciences, but with no great impact. The overwhelming liberal/Left leanings of the social sciences are examined in terms of their relation (or lack thereof) to the field's organization of knowledge. The implications of the field's political bent are considered, in particular, three rather calamitous effects: the inclination to lie, the inclination toward self-deception, & utopianism. A fourth possible consequence -- the threat to academic freedom -- is also discussed. K. Coddon

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- Preface -- Introduction -- Chapter 1. The Classical Yerstehen Position -- Chapter 2. The Positivists' Critique I: Not a Method of Verification -- Chapter 3. The Positivists' Critique II: Not a Necessary Condition for Understanding -- Chapter 4. Verstehen and Ordinary Language Philosophy -- Chapter 5. Verstehen and Situational Logic -- Chapter 6. Verstehen and Phenomenology -- Chapter 7. Verstehen and the Sciences of Man -- Chapter 8. Verstehen and Anthropology -- Chapter 9. Verstehen and Critical Theory -- Conclusion: Towards a Theory of Methodological Pluralism -- Index

Résumé Deux collègues sociologues brésiliens analysent la fondation du système d'enseignement et de recherche des sciences sociales dans leur pays. Bien que de fondation récente, son expansion est notoire. Ils nous présentent l'état des lieux ainsi que les thèmes étudiés selon la conjoncture politique et sociale. Ils analysent le passage de thèmes consacrés aux analyses macrosociales à des thèmes plus circonscrits aux nouvelles questions sociales, à la sociologie de l'entreprise ou aux études régionales, suite aux échecs rencontrés par les politiques publiques et aux espoirs déçus.

This collection of essays provides the first systematic and multidisciplinary analysis of the role of gender in the formation and dissemination of the American social sciences in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Other books have traced the history of academic social science without paying attention to gender, or have described women's social activism while ignoring its relation to the production of new social knowledge. In contrast, this volume draws long overdue attention to the ways in which changing gender relations shaped the development and organization of the new social knowledge. And it challenges the privileged position that academic--and mostly male--social science has been granted in traditional histories by showing how women produced and popularized new forms of social knowledge in such places as settlement houses and the Russell Sage Foundation. The book's varied perspectives, building on recent work in history and feminist theory, break from the traditional view of the social sciences as objective bodies of expert knowledge. Contributors examine new forms of social knowledge, rather, as discourses about gender relations and as methods of cultural critique. The book will create a new framework for understanding the development of both social science and the history of gender relations in the United States. The contributors are: Guy Alchon, Nancy Berlage, Desley Deacon, Mary Dietz, James Farr, Nancy Folbre, Kathryn Kish Sklar, Dorothy Ross, Helene Silverberg, and Kamala Visweswaran

Part of the Conference on the State of the Social Sciences held at Boston U, 6-7 Dec 2002. Papers on "The Actual Preoccupations of the Social Sciences" are discussed. Scientism & politics are considered, as are the left-wing politicization of the social sciences & the related matter of intentionalist, functionalist, & Marxist theories of society. The culturalist theory of society is explicated, an approach that is comparatively complex yet generally neglected by manipulators of symbols. This approach also potentially contests the politicization of social science by problematizing theory itself, & accords with our own scholarly experiences. K. Coddon

Part of the Conference on the State of the Social Sciences held at Boston U, 6-7 Dec 2002. Papers on "The Actual Preoccupations of the Social Sciences" are discussed. Scientism & politics are considered, as are the left-wing politicization of the social sciences & the related matter of intentionalist, functionalist, & Marxist theories of society. The culturalist theory of society is explicated, an approach that is comparatively complex yet generally neglected by manipulators of symbols. This approach also potentially contests the politicization of social science by problematizing theory itself, & accords with our own scholarly experiences. K. Coddon

Science remains an eminently social institution, though the interactions between science & society are often poorly understood. This article addresses the context of recent efforts to identify environmental contributions to cancer. The authors first examine cancer incidence & discuss how incidence patterns may be related to air pollution & occupational & general toxic chemical & xenestrogen exposures. They then discuss the social context in which cancer research & treatment occurs, including the dominating role of the biomedical model & socioeconomic factors, including regulatory strategies that address single chemicals, corporate conflicts of interest, & the manipulation of public opinion. Last, they consider the broad context out of which cancer arises & discuss the merits of applying the precautionary principle to sustainable social policies. Progress in reducing cancer may be fruitfully made by returning our attention to broad-scale factors such as those affecting the quality of air, water, workplace, household environments, & the global climate. 92 References. [Copyright 2002 Sage Publications, Inc.]

Social historians formed an important part of the Social Science History Association from its early days, and they widened its intellectual space beyond initial emphases on political history and quantitative methods. Lee Benson and other faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as well as Charles and Louise Tilly, were particularly influential in attracting a broad mix of scholars to the group. The openness of the association and its interdisciplinarity appealed to younger scholars, and those interested in the "new urban history" were early recruits. A growing number of women, many of whom were social historians, participated in the first conventions and newly organized networks.