Search results

Las ciencias sociales contextualizan el estudio de los movimientos sociales, considerando que aportan y fundamentan teorías y métodos sociales que permiten observar los procesos de configuración política, histórica y territorial de estos movimientos. En este contexto es apropiado recorrer el ámbito de las disciplinas, de la teoría social y del método para explicar los elementos de contacto teórico y disciplinar de las ciencias sociales con los movimientos sociales, entendidos como objetos de estudio

El objetivo de este artícues mostrar la relevancia que la filosofía de las ciencias sociales (FCS) tiene para la investigación que llevan a cabo las disciplinas sociales. Identifico qué obstáculos han impedido reconocer su importancia, al tiempo que sugiero algunas estrategias para revertirlos. Así, señalaré que, en el contexto local de las ciencias sociales, la comprensión parcial de los compromisos intelectuales de la filosofía de la ciencia (FC) ha constituido un primer obstáculo. Explicaré cómo puede corregirse esa visión parcial, señalando cuál es el valor de las preguntas de carácter filosófico y cómo complementan el trabajo epistemológico de las ciencias sociales. Un segundo obstáculo la condición de autosuficiencia que las propias ciencias sociales conciben con respecto a los debates epistemológicos de su trabajo. En la última parte expondré mediante tres ejemplos cómo la FCS hace aportaciones importantes sobre debates que son cruciales en las ciencias sociales contemporáneas: la causalidad social, el papel de la interpretación y la objetividad científica.

This article tries to articulate certain drifts in 'social psychology of science' with different contributions from 'feminist studies of science.' This is done in a reflexive aim in order to analyze how gender structures intersect the practices of psychological knowledge production. In this process sexual subjects and objects of psychological knowledge are constructed. It is also stressed, the relevance given in feminist epistemologies to the analysis of subjectivities conformation in the production of science. As well as, to the role of diverse subject-knowledge-positions and its necessary democratic inclusion for a more objective and social fair science-psychology.

This is a study of what it is to write up a piece of research. That is, a study of the power of writing. Postmodernism has had its sway over social psychology as such as over the other social sciences. It has set a query against established forms of scientific writing, and what they imply. Social studies of science and technology have debunked the fiction of scientific method, especially in the allegedly 'hard' sciences. Equally, in the so-called 'soft' sciences, New, experimental forms of ethnography, done by postmodern anthropologists, have doubted the very idea of the ethnographer's authority. Whether qualitative or quantitative, all methods are now in question. This article reviews new literary forms which might offer a way to both challenge the ever-present issues of power, while at the same time keeping true to the social scientist's fundamental aim - to promote society's reflection on itself. To do so, one will have to break fee from such limiting, but unconscious, binaries as the divide between object and subject, reality and fiction, and between form and content. Auto-ethnography, as Creative Analytical Practice presents itself as one such promising literary form.

¿Rememoración, conmemoración? Cincuenta años después del Mayo de 68 resulta difícil diferenciar entre historia y memoria, pero una cosa es muy clara: el movimiento de mayo marcó a escala mundial una ruptura, el fin de una época –industrial– y el ingreso a otra, en la que la cultura es fundamental. Sin embargo, el artículo muestra que los actores a menudo prefirieron concebir su acción dentro de las categorías del mundo del que se estaba queriendo salir. Ello no impidió que las ciencias humanas y sociales, también dominadas por categorías pertenecientes a ese mundo agonizante, intentaran aquí y allá liberarse de ellas, algunas veces de una forma conservadora, incluso reaccionaria. Este artículo examina los asuntos teóricos que se esbozaron o precisaron a partir de Mayo del 68 para esas disciplinas; dibuja el espacio de los enfoques u orientaciones que así se confrontaron y extrae algunas lecciones para los debates contemporáneos en los que la subjetividad de los actores y los procesos de subjetivación y de desubjetivación ocupan un lugar importante.

This article presents some results about a project research whose purpose was analyzed the cultural elements related with cultural difference that incorporate traditional textbooks, in order to identify contributions to future educational proposals.Two main categories had been for providing some theoretical bases that underlie: cultural difference and textbooks. The study was conducted from a qualitative approach. It was performed particularly Content Analysis (AC). As results emerged that the textbooks have been immersing themselves in their own community dynamics. The subjects that incorporate the textbooks show critical glances about different situations that ethnic groups have lived, offer the possibility of moving between the past and the present. This research shows a transit from an assimilationist model to a multiculturalist model like option for building an educational
work from cultural difference.

This article aims to resume and give structure to the debate about "teaching and learning qualitative methods in social sciences" (http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/about/editorialPolicies#deb), which is currently taking place in the trilingual journal Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research. The core of the debate is composed, at the moment, by nine texts with different characteristics, with authors in different academic positions and with very diverse approaches. The aim of this presentation is to open the debate to Ibero-America and to invite Hispanic students, teachers, researchers and professionals to participate and to enrich the discussion with their experiences and reflections. The text starts by explaining the rise of the debate during one particular conference in Germany (http://www.berliner-methodentreffen.de/) and by pointing out different links with other questions related to qualitative research. Short reviews of the contributions are presented in three sections: background, theoretical contributions, and experiences. Finally, four main topics are identified to occur in the actual discussion: the social context of teaching and learning, epistemological models and their implication for the teaching process, specific didactic models and experiences for qualitative research and, finally, the role of the researcher as teacher and student and his/her personal "compatibility" with qualitative methods.

Science has been adopted as an object of study by various other disciplines, among them psychology. Approaches to the 'psychology of science' can be grouped as (1) works based principally on the study of the personal characteristics of scientists in terms of types of reasoning, personality, or special capacities such as creativity that differentiate them from non-scientists; & (2) those focused more on the cognitive aspects of science, such as philosophers, epistemologists, & cognitive psychologists or scientists sharing their interests. Areas of interest include processes of normalization in science, normative aspects in processes of publication, processes of social influence & social comparison, values & beliefs in science, belief systems, science & ideology, ethics in the production of scientific knowledge, organizational context of scientific research, & science-society relations. Prominent authors & their works in these & other areas are referenced.