Suchergebnisse

"In Beyond Dogmatism. Studies in Historical Sociology Andrea Borghini offers a general overwiew of the perspective of Historical Sociology through distinguished authors working in this field. Each of the contributing chapters traverses the history of sociological thought in a rich and innovative way. Through the analysis of authors such as Bourdieu, Lukàcs, Chase Dunn, Gramsci, Polanyi, Sombart, Mann and topics such as the Critique of Capitalism, the Fetishism of Commodities, the Sociology of Concepts, and various comparisons between Sociology and Political Science, an enlightening panorama is composed. The end result is to restore the extreme topicality and richness of an approach that is particularly valuable for describing and interpreting the dynamics of our age. Contributors are Ricardo A. Dello Buono, Gerardo Pastore, Domenico Maddaloni, Cory Blad, Enrico Campo, Alfonso Maurizio Iacono, Roberta Iannone, Andrea Borghini, Elena Gremigni, Eleonora Piromalli, Lorenzo Sabetta, Carmelo Lombardo and Alfredo Ferrara "--

The contribution aims to reflect on the emancipatory role that sociology can play, in its public dimension, when confronted with a total institution, such as the penitentiary. The historical-critical assumptions from which the reflection moves can be traced, on the one hand, to those values of inclusion and social justice to which public sociology, in the 'version' that Burawoy (re)launched in 2004, looks to as inalienable ethical principles. And which, notoriously, due to the type of inmate population in penal institutions (Italian and otherwise) and the history of the penitentiary itself, are often disregarded and ignored. On the other hand, it seems more interesting than ever to test the liberating capacity of sociology in a 'public' institution such as the prison, in comparison with a 'public' with peculiar characteristics, which only partially reflects that notion of organic public that has become increasingly central in Burawoy's conception. This 'social experiment' will be conducted from a particularly interesting case study, namely the project of university prison centres, which constitute a virtuous encounter between university culture and the prison world. Specifically, the group under investigation will be inmates enrolled in university courses. Through this case study, it will be possible to verify the limits and possibilities of a sociological style, which turns out to be sociology in its public version, which represents, in an era of strong social inequalities and urgent global issues, a valuable tool to give voice and centrality to sociology, to its critical demands and, through of it, try to listen to the 'cry of pain' coming from a growing part of the men and women of our world.

In my contribution, I intend to move from Positivismusstreit in order to work through the complex and in part unexplored rapport of Popper with the topic of Society. It is possible to point out some parts in Popper's paper that was presented in Tübingen that reinforce the idea of a social connotation of science present in Popper's conception of epistemology. These parts, in my opinion, have two immediate and significant consequences: on one hand, they support the thesis of one of the scholars of Popper, Ian Jarvie, who, in a volume from 2001, suggested a rereading of the epistemological reflections of Popper from a social approach. Second, these parts offer a perspective on the reading which represents new hindsight regarding the conception of 'Social' of the two key scholars Popper and Adorno. Through a reconstruction of the initial positions, this article will attempt to present the Popperian interpretation of the relationship between Science and Society and the role of Sociology. If opportunely reconsidered, these aspects may actually be an instrument through which it is possible to pinpoint an absolutely unexpected common theme between the participants at Tübingen.

L'autore sviluppa una versione critica del concetto di Governance: in particolare, focalizza l'attenzione sul nesso concettuale tra Stato e Governance da cui trarre indicazioni sui limiti del meccanismo della. La dialettica Stato-č applicata a due scenari specifici: lo scenario internazionale e lo scenario della teoria del potere. Nel primo, l'autore utilizza lo Stato-nazione come chiave concettuale privilegiata per comprendere i fallimenti dellaglobale; nel secondo, introducendo una versione bourdesiana di Stato, come detentore del potere simbolico, intende, da un lato, far emergere una prospettiva inedita del concetto di Stato, all'altro, fare della categoria di potere simbolico uno strumento in grado di svelare i rischi autoritari sottesi ai processi di. L'autore conclude con una breve analisi dei rapporti tra lae il concetto foucaultiano di, una prospettiva teorica utile nella misura in cui consente di chiarire la riorganizzazione e ricollocazione del potere nelle societŕ complesse.

"This is a book about food, philosophy, and intellectual property rights. Taken separately, these are three well-known subjects; but it is uncommon to consider them together. Delivering a rich field of disputes, the book is comprised of 50 case studies, organized around eight themes: images; genericity and descriptiveness; language traps; procedures; menus, recipes, and creativity; boundaries; biotech; and empowerment. The introductory chapter frames the selection of cases and encourages readers to look beyond them, envisaging new lenses to look at food vis-à-vis intellectual property. The terrain encompassed is wide-ranging and reaches out to fine-grained aspects of food products, recipes, and cooking. Conceived for a wide scope of readers, the volume ultimately interrogates the links between food and cultural identity, bringing to the fore the ethical, political, aesthetic worth of culinary arts and gastronomic experiences. This accessible book will be of value to scholars, students, practitioners and others with interests in the areas of intellectual property, food law and food studies"--

AbstractOur aim in this paper is to employ conceptual negotiation to inform a method of rethinking defective food concepts, that is concepts that fail to suitably represent a certain food-related domain or that offer representations that run counter to the interests of their users. We begin by sorting out four dimensions of a food concept: (i) the data upon which it rests and the methodology by which those data are gathered; (ii) the ontology that sustains it; (iii) the social acts that serve to negotiate and establish the concept; (iv) and the aims and values that it fosters. We then discuss the conditions that make a food concept defective, pointing out four types of defects—fragility, polarization, incoherence, and schizophrenia—which we illustrate by means of two specific examples: local food and healthy food.

Liberal democracies across the world have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by implementing measures that significantly curtail the rights and liberties of individual citizens. These measures must receive public justification in order to be politically legitimate. By combining analytical political philosophy with ontology in an original way, in this article we argue that liberal democratic governments have so far failed to adequately justify these measures, since they have not systematically targeted the scholarly study of COVID-19 in everyday environments, consequently implementing rules that are epistemically unsound and not publicly justified, at least not fully.