Anthology in Law and the Social Sciences: While this book does not purport or pretend to have all the answers to the many social challenges that we face in life, it certainly does raise some thought-provoking questions for us to think through. I hasten to add, however, that the book is not a work of fiction. Neither is it about motivation like many motivational books that are on the bookshelves today. Rather, it is an example of public intellectualism in Law and the Social Sciences. The book distills complex ideas that are often confined to the academic world into more easily discernible ideas by everyone, including the laity. Such is a cardinal objective of the book \2013 to provoke some critical thinking across a broad spectrum of society on certain topical themes pertaining to Law and the Social Sciences. With an inter- and multi-disciplinary focus, the book cuts across many contemporary themes in the Law and Social Science discourse
W roku 2011, na mocy decyzji administracyjnej, dokonano korekty podziału polskiej nauki na dziedziny i dyscypliny naukowe. W rezultacie takiego procesu zmieniła się przynależność dziedzinowa m.in. nauk o polityce. Do 30 września 2011 r. dyscyplina ta zaliczana była do dziedziny nauk humanistycznych, a po tej dacie włączono ją do nowej dziedziny nauk społecznych, która została wyodrębniona w wyniku podziału tej pierwszej. Ponieważ zmiana ta wywołała trwającą do dziś dyskusję na temat celowości dokonanej reformy także wśród politologów, ważnym zadaniem podjętych badań była próba potwierdzenia tezy, wg której decyzja taka była uzasadniona merytorycznie. Założono bowiem, że dyscyplina nauki o polityce, w porównaniu z dyscyplinami nauk humanistycznych, ma więcej cech wspólnych z innymi dyscyplinami zaliczonymi do dziedziny nauk społecznych. Ponadto, poprzez ustalenie nowego wykazu dziedzin i dyscyplin naukowych, administracyjne podziały w polskiej nauce zostały w znacznym stopniu dostosowane do klasyfikacji dziedzin i dyscyplin wypracowanych na forum OECD, UNESCO i EUROSTAT, co ułatwi internacjonalizację współpracy naukowej. Na forach tych organizacji i instytucji, a co za tym idzie także w wielu ich państwach członkowskich, już wcześniej podzielono nauki humanistyczne – kiedyś zamiennie nazywane naukami społecznymi – na dwie dziedziny: nauk społecznych i nauk humanistycznych. W celu potwierdzenia słuszności ww. tezy w toku rozważań konieczne było: ustalenie współczesnego pojmowania istoty specjalności naukowej, dyscypliny naukowej i dziedziny nauki; wskazanie najważniejszych podziałów w nauce; podjęcie próby określenia specyfiki dziedziny nauk humanistycznych oraz dziedziny nauk społecznych, a także ukazanie relacji nauk o polityce z tymi dziedzinami nauk. Ocena intensywności takich relacji umożliwiła potwierdzenie słuszności przyjętej tezy. ; By virtue of an administrative decision, the division of Polish academia into fields and disciplines was verified in 2011. It is owing to this process that political science, among others, was reassigned in Poland. Before September 30, 2011, political science was classified as one of the humanities, but later on it was included in the new field of the social sciences, created as a result of the division of the humanities. This decision started an ongoing discussion, also in the circles of political scientists, on the issue of how advisable this change is, and it has become an important task to confirm the thesis that this decision was substantially justified. It is assumed that political science as a discipline has more in common with other disciplines assigned to the social sciences than the humanities. Additionally, by way of developing a new register of academic fields and disciplines, the administrative divisions in Polish academia were to a large extent aligned with the classification of fields and disciplines adopted by the OECD, UNESCO and EUROSTAT, which will facilitate the internationalization of academic collaboration. The above organizations and institutions, and – consequently – some of their member states, have already divided the humanities, which used to be alternatively named social sciences, into two separate fields: the social sciences and the humanities. In order to justify the above-mentioned thesis it was necessary to determine how academic specialization, discipline and field of science are perceived today; to indicate the essential divisions in academia; to attempt to define the specific nature of the humanities versus social sciences; and to present the relations of political science to the latter category. The assessment of how intensive these relations are, made it possible to confirm that the above-mentioned thesis is justified.
It is argued that the impacts of computer technology on society are an extraordinarily important area for rigorous social scientific research. However, there is currently only a modest amount of empirical research & a dearth of cumulative findings on this subject, & the conceptual & theoretical approaches informing the research are weak. After specifying the primary sources of the understandings about the social impacts of computing, a taxonomy of impacts & a conceptual framework that might guide social scientific research on this subject are suggested. Finally, eight broad generalizations that can be derived from the existing empirical research on the social impacts of computing are summarized. 1 Table, 1 Figure, 80 References. HA
part Part I Methodology: Collaborations and Disputes -- chapter 1 Martin Krygier (1982), 'The Concept of Law and Social Theory', Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2, pp. 155-80. -- chapter 2 Kim Lane Scheppele (1994), 'Legal Theory and Social Theory', Annual Review of Sociology, 20, pp. -383-406. -- chapter 3 Brian Z. Tamanaha (1995), 'An Analytical Map of Social Scientific Approaches to the Concept of Law', Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 15, pp. 501-35. -- chapter 4 Roger Cotterrell (1998), 'Why Must Legal Ideas be Interpreted Sociologically?', Journal of Law and Society, 25, pp. 171-92. -- chapter 5 Nicola Lacey (2006), 'Analytical Jurisprudence Versus Descriptive Sociology Revisited', Texas Law Review, 89, pp. 945-82. -- chapter 6 Christopher McCrudden (2006), 'Legal Research and the Social Sciences', Law Quarterly Review, 122, pp. 632-50. -- chapter 7 Geoffrey Samuel (2008), 'Is Law Really a Social Science? A View from Comparative Law', Cambridge Law Journal, 67, pp. 288-32l. -- part Part II Common Problems: Modes of Explanation of Behaviour -- chapter 8 Gunther Teubner (1989), 'How the Law Thinks: Toward a Constructivist Epistemology of Law',Law and Society Review, 23, pp. 727-58. -- chapter 9A.I. Ogus (1989), 'Law and Spontaneous Order: Hayek's Contribution to Legal Theory', Journal of Law and Society, 16, pp. 393-409. -- chapter 10 Lewis A. Kornhauser (1999), 'The Normativity of Law', American Law and Economics Review, 1, pp. 3-25. -- chapter 11 David Nelken (2004), 'Using the Concept of Legal Culture', Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 29, pp. 1-26. -- chapter 12 Matthew Noah Smith (2006), 'The Law as a Social Practice: Are Shared Activities at the Foundations of Law?', Legal Theory, 12, pp. 265-92. -- part Part III Common Objects: Modes of Explanation of Legal Phenomena -- chapter 13 Martin Krygier (1986), 'Law as Tradition', Law and Philosophy, 5, pp. 237-62. -- chapter 14 Elizabeth Mertz (1992), 'Language, Law, and Social Meanings: Linguistic/Anthropological Contributions to the Study of Law',Law and Society Review, 26, pp.413-45. -- chapter 15 Rodolfo Sacco (1995), 'Mute Law', American Journal of Comparative Law, 43, pp.455-67. -- chapter 16 William Twining (2005), 'Social Science and Diffusion of Law',Journal of Law and Society, 32, pp. 203-40. -- chapter 17 Brian Z. Tamanaha (2008), 'Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to Global', Sydney Law Review, 30, pp. 375-41l.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Since biology is the study of living organisms, their behavior & social systems, & since humans are living organisms, it is possible to suggest that social sciences (the study of human behavior & social systems) are branches of biology & all social scientific theories should be consistent with known biological principles. To claim otherwise & to establish a separate science only for humans might be analogous to the establishment of hydrogenology, the study of hydrogen separate from & inconsistent with the rest of physics. Evolutionary psychology is the application of evolutionary biology to humans, & provides the most general (panspecific) explanations of human behavior, cognitions, emotions, & human social systems. Evolutionary psychology's recognition that humans are animals can explain some otherwise perplexing empirical puzzles in social sciences, such as why there is a wage penalty for motherhood but a wage reward for fatherhood, & why boys produce a greater wage reward for fathers than do girls. The General Social Survey data illustrate the evolutionary psychological argument that reproductive success is important for both men's & women's happiness, but money is only important for men's. 1 Table, 1 Figure, 74 References. Adapted from the source document.
Mode of access: Internet. ; MAIN; AQ.A45 suppl.: Other supplements are bound with Its Annals for the corresponding years, except supplement Mar. 1916 Index v.1-52 which is bound separately ; BUSI; H1.A4 suppl.: All other supplements are bound with Its Annals, with call number H1.A4 BUSI
Mode of access: Internet. ; MAIN; AQ.A45 suppl.: Other supplements are bound with Its Annals for the corresponding years, except supplement Mar. 1916 Index v.1-52 which is bound separately ; BUSI; H1.A4 suppl.: All other supplements are bound with Its Annals, with call number H1.A4 BUSI
