Suchergebnisse

Social science was slow to diffuse into Pakistan, but by the 1970s a critique of Western positivist social science had developed. Without alternative epistemological foundations & theoretical frameworks, however, Pakistani social science is still limited to speculative analysis & fact-gathering & lacks creativity. Its objectivity suffers from the opposing tendencies to xenophilia & ethnocentrism. The locations of social science departments & statistics on social scientists in Pakistan are described, along with a continued reliance on imported social science knowledge, which has limited influences for local application & development. The absence of a cultural ethos & the conflict between religion & science impede the development of social science in Pakistan; other impediments noted are the overintegration of the Western tradition, restrictions on freedom, the low status accorded social scientists (except economists), & the lack of cohesion among the social-scientific body. 43 References. M. Pflum

Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) raises many cultural, ethical, legal, social, and political issues, yet in the growing area of GGR research, humanities and social sciences (HASS) research is often marginalized, constrained and depoliticised. This global dynamic is illustrated by an analysis of the UK GGR research programme. This dynamic matters for the knowledge produced and for its users. Without HASS contributions, too narrow a range of perspectives, futures and issues will be considered, undermining or overpromising the prospects for the responsible development of GGR (and threatening worse side-effects), and limiting our understanding of why and how policy demands GGR solutions in the first place. In response, we present policy principles for bringing HASS fully into GGR research, organized around three themes: (1) HASS-led GGR research, (2) Opening up GGR futures, and (3) The politics of GGR futures.

All three of the books under review— Science and Social Science by Malcolm Williams, Rethinking Science by Jan Faye, and Open the Social Sciences by the members of the Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences (Immanuel Wallerstein, chair)—argue for a broadly naturalist approach in which the social sciences are seen as of a piece with the natural sciences. Fortunately, all three do so in a discriminating way that avoids simple options and that appreciates the important ways the social-scientific disciplines require their own approach. Open the Social Sciences in particular also contains detailed and wise advice as to how the contemporary social sciences should proceed if they want to fulfill their ambition to explain human social behavior in a scientific way.

The development of new approaches in recent times has brought about major changes in the study of social and political life. They reject almost everything that has been traditionally accepted, for which they have been severely criticized. But focusing on academic issues alone won't help much. We can understand the new approaches, their concerns, their rejection of science as model, their disdain for objectivity, universality, truth, relevance and so on, more adequately by relating them to the social conditions that obtain in the West. There are, however, major differences between these conditions and those that obtain in countries like India. And the kind of problems facing these countries can be addressed meaningfully by the more traditional approach than by the approaches developed recently. This is why, while it does not seem to have much future in the West, where it originated and continued for long, it may survive, even flourish, in countries like India.