Suchergebnisse

An introduction to an edited Vol on the poignancy of social movements focuses on past research, present problems, & future developments. It is maintained that current scholarship has neglected the actual/potential effects of social movements, as well as conditions & processes that enhance or detract from a movement's impact. Contributors address the gap by exploring theoretical questions regarding which aspects of society are modified by social movements & by conducting empirical evaluations of the impact of contemporary social movements in different countries. A review shows that most social movement studies are limited by their focus on success/failure, policy outcomes, & causality. In contrast, contributions view social movements as complex sets of actors, groups, & organizations with different perceptions of success. They also distinguish between intended & unintended consequences, & consider the counterproductive potential of the latter. The durability & direction of change are discussed, along with the need for a coherent theoretical framework for social movement outcomes. 1 Figure. J. Lindroth

Suggests that MOST [Management of Social Sciences Transformations] priority themes and research topics may be considered to be foci in strategic information management. MOST is a recently established UNESCO programme of international social science research on ethnicity and multicultural society, cities as arenas of accelerated social transformations and local impacts of global environmental, technological and economic transformations. (Original abstract-amended)

This paper is concerned with understanding how social science research comes to influence legal decision makers. Part one suggests that three dimensions are important in understanding the probable utilization of social science knowledge. These are the identity of the user, whether or not the research is commissioned by a user and whether the research takes the form of a study or a synthesis. Whether research is basic or applied in its orientation is regarded as less important than the preceding considerations. Part two examines the ways in which social science research is actually used by administrative agencies and then asks whether those patterns that apply in administrative agencies are likely to be duplicated by courts. Judges in appellate courts, it is argued, treat social science research in much the same way as do policy makers in administrative agencies, which is to say that direct and dispositive uses are rare, but research may serve an enlightenment or strategic function. Trial decision makers, on the other hand, are often directly influenced by social science findings. The difference between the utilization of social science research at the trial and appellate levels are explained by structural consideration.

The rise of CRISPR not only opens up multiple opportunities for genetic editing but also results in potentially threatening or controversial applications. Research needs to be done in order to appreciate how CRISPR affects the identity and role of individuals within society and reshapes social, political, and economic regimes. A biblio- metric analysis of articles on CRISPR published in academic journals in the period 2012-2020 helps identify the main research themes on genome editing that have been addressed in social sciences and humanities so far. Results suggest that CRISPR studies have primarily focused on normative and ethical issues, together with more specific attention toward issues of public perception, trust toward science, regulation and governance of critical applications, and, especially, around the manipulation of the genome of human embryos. Results also suggest that issues of commercial, cultural, and geopolitical sorts have been left relatively unattended so far, instead. Attention to the implications of CRIRPS on such areas should inform the future social sciences and humanities research agenda on genome editing.

The dialectical process of thesis-antithesis-synthesis is not always adequate to explain all the causes & phenomena in social life & social science. A replacement for dialectics is proposed: "trialectics," in which three independent variables of thesis-antithesis-conthesis generate a synthesis through interaction. "Conthesis" is the new determinant that binds & bridges thesis & antithesis. This trialectic or tridimensional system is tested against specific cases, including: functional system of the universe; behavioral pattern of needs-rights-duties; international system network; human development; law & process of motion; & ecological function & behavior. 16 Diagrams. Modified HA

Interest has grown in the past few years about the place of social work in science. Questions remain, such as whether social work should be considered a science, and if so, where it fits into the constellation of sciences. This article attempts to shed light on these questions. After briefly considering past and present constructions of science and reflecting on views of science within the social work profession over time, we present an argument for how social work contributes to predominant questions facing science today through its unique ability to draw together and integrate knowledge from a variety of disciplines. Finally, we address how the profession can best prepare the coming generation of social workers to operate to their full potential in the current transdisciplinary world of science.

Franco Ferrarotti hopes to lead sociologists away from overly reductionistic, technical measurement of their subjects_an approach that has increasingly been problematized by the natural sciences_toward a rediscovery of (auto)biographical materials and the value of the individual