Suchergebnisse

AbstractTo the extent that intersectionality is becoming a common term in mainstream social science, it is as a methodological justification to separate out different racial, ethnic, gender, class, and other social groups for empirical analysis. One might call this the "intersectionality hypothesis," and in its best incarnation, it is about getting the facts right and finding the differences that matter. But an intersectional analysis in the social sciences often involves more than this. An intersectional approach also leads to potentially different interpretations of the same facts, or what we term a different social explanation. It is not only the intersection of categories that defines an intersectional project, then, but the theoretical framing that informs the analysis and interpretation of the subject under study. This framing often leads to an analysis of multiple and even conflicting social dynamics that enable certain kinds of social understanding that are otherwise invisible when scholars focus on a single set of social dynamics. Because the social theoretical aspects of research on intersectionality are rarely discussed, relative to the more methodological and ontological aspects of intersectionality, this is our main subject matter in this article. We focus on the process of developing social explanations rooted in the intersection of multiple social dynamics in several examples from our own research and across a variety of topics in social science research.

Science and technology, as rational approaches to problem solving, are driving forces in the promotion of democracy at home and abroad. Science based decision-making is increasingly global as countries share technology, research results, and engage in joint studies on common problems. The widening rift between global wealth and poverty diminishes for many the opportunity for exposure to science, technology and social science based decision-making on issues that directly affect them. This paper outlines a model for democratizing science by utilizing the interactive tools of the social sciences in a process that enables information-marginalized people to engage with the language, methods and results of social science for purposes of community empowerment and voice in science policy. The paper offers examples of approaches to implementation, citing various forms of research partnerships with communities, and discusses challenges including ethical considerations, the conflict between "local" and science-based knowledges and power differentials in practice.

Research of a variety of kinds has been undertaken by the European Community. Areas studied include economic policy issues & prospects, social trends, housing trends, labor movements, the distribution of wealth, environmental problems, industrial sites, & PO polls. Each directorate-general is responsible for commissioning studies in his own field of competence. 2 Tables. W. H. Stoddard.

Despite the opposition that presumably exists between empirical & authoritarian thinking, there has been in recent yrs some development of soc sci res, including PO surveys, in the USSR, & a striking development of it in Poland. The Polish work shows internal evidence of honest reporting & a genuinely empirical spirit. The Russian work, however, exemplified by 9 recent PO surveys by Komsomolskaya Pravda, is marred by an apparent obliviousness to the self-selection bias in mail surveys, & a complete ignoring of the problem of response bias, which in an authoritarian society might be expected to be acute. Frankness cannot be taken for granted. The generally practical, instrumental character of Communist res raises a question as to whether it may merely make totalitarism a more efficient & formidable enemy. But there are grounds for hope in the thought that an invigoration of the empirical spirit may in the long run tend to erode the mythological elements in Communism. AA.