Suchergebnisse

This volume brings together key findings of the research project 'Religious Individualisation in Historical Perspective' at the Max Weber Centre for Advanced Cultural and Social Studies. Combining a wide range of disciplinary approaches, methods and theories, the volume assembles over 50 contributions that explore and compare processes of religious individualisation in Asia, the Mediterranean, and Europe from antiquity to the recent past.

The up to date legislations has gone that far, as they foresee the type and the length of conviction regarding each penal charge. However, this stage presents a specific development of public reaction against criminality, and its essence consists of a theoretical and practical engagement that individual conviction should be adjusted to the subjective attributes and qualities of the author who has committed the penal act. Analysing the background of this individualism, it was concluded that the aim of this engagement initially has been to avoid arbitraries and misuse, especially the violence of citizen's equality. Over the years and with the evolution of judicial-penal system through this individualisation, the misinterpretation expectation in determining the way of importance of the subjective -objective circumstances regarding the authors of the penal acts, in the completion of this misinterpreted element that legal individualisation contained was considered. Hence, the penal judicial science processed a formal -procedural theory which was known as judicial individualisation. This theory comprises of various laws which defines the basic criteria of the conviction terms; while the court based on each individual case as well as based on the mitigating and aggravating circumstances defines the type and the length of conviction even though this individualisation has as a main criteria, the penal culpability and responsibility of the author. Thus, this type of individualisation is not majorly supported. Such result probably has come as a consequence of the necessity of deep recognition of the author's personality who has committed the penal act by the side of the respective penal preceding authority based on the studied circumstances. Over time and actions, the basic conditions to issue a conviction, definitively in order to grant it the case evolution is that it will be laid in the execution space of the penal conviction. Precisely, for this execution to be in the spirit of the above mentioned individualisations, the practice had the need for the relative rationalisation in the framework of sentence suffering. This necessity has led to what is called the "administrative individualisation". This presents a sort of sentence individualisation by which the viewpoints in the penology literature is applied by the organs and the personnel of the entities, and the improving punishment institutions. This individualisation is narrower and has to do with the suitability of one's convicted personality during the time that he is suffering the sentence in such institutions. According to the criteria of penology science, this individualisation is being made on the basis of knowing the personality of the convicted person, on the observation basis and on the analytical study of the respective experts.

L'auteur souligne, d'entrée de jeu, que si beaucoup de réflexions contemporaines sur les rapports entre la société et l'État se terminent par des points d'interrogation, c'est parce que nous ne savons pas de quelle société nous sommes en train de parler. La conscience de cette limite devient ainsi un instrument méthodologique indispensable pour interroger l'actuelle société qui déplace ses investissements sur les dimensions symboliques de l'action humaine. Par la suite, l'auteur examine l'incidence sur cette société du fait que l'information soit devenue la ressource centrale dans la production de la reproduction. Il poursuit en se penchant sur la transformation de la logique de domination et l'obligation qu'elle entraîne de dégager de nouveaux instruments d'analyse et la nécessité de faire faire un saut qualitatif aux concepts sociologiques pour aborder avec pertinence les nouvelles questions que ce social nouveau impose. C'est là que se pose la problématique de l'information, comme ressource centrale, et de son rapport à l'individualisation socialisée. L'auteur conclut que cette nouvelle individualisation, caractérisée par la capacité d'apprendre à apprendre, met en jeu une certaine idée du sujet collectif. Alors, le problème pour l'analyste est de repérer le champ de dilemmes, de conflits, et les conditions d'apparition des acteurs, des mouvements sociaux. En conclusion, l'auteur souligne que l'interrogation scientifique sur le champ est elle-même un élément du champ, et donc que les chercheurs, analystes et théoriciens sont autant construits par l'action sociale qu'ils contribuent à la construction de cette dernière. Ce qui l'amène à terminer en précisant qu'en avoir conscience constitue pour le « scientifique » son seul avantage et sa seule responsabilité.

Prompted by what he sees as a number of serious errors in Elizabeth Barnard's article, "The Context of the British Parole System" (P.J., 27:2, May 1980), the author reappraises the extent of post-war con sensus about and commitment to state welfare services; examines the notions of rehabilitation and correctionalism; exposes the attack on social work implicit in some radical critiques of social institutions; sketches the possibilities for a humanised justice system; and, finally, argues against overt, routinised and inflexible surveillance and control in the Probation Service.

"In this paper, the authors discuss individualization theory as a parsimonious framework concept to describe and explain core points of fertility change in Western societies since the end of the 19th century. They emphasize two dimensions of individualization: firstly, the increase in status of the individual in cultural, social, economic and legal respects (human dignity); secondly, the increase in autonomy and freedom of choice. In contrast to other approaches based on individualization theory, the authors do not use the concept of self-realization in the sense of an increased orientation towards purely individual interests, not least because this concept has failed before the renewed rise in fertility that has recently been observed in some advanced societies. They discuss the relevance of these two dimensions of individualization in the context of the first transition and the 1960s with its declining fertility rates. Whereas the first demographic transition can be mainly explained by the rising status of children, which increased the costs of parenting and thus changed the interests of (potential) parents to have children, the transition in the 1960s resulted mainly from the rising status of women in education and the labor market. An important but hitherto neglected change was the increasing divorce rates, as the possibility to dissolve a marriage devalued the traditional gender contract of the breadwinner/ housewife model and decreased the willingness of women and men to invest in marriage and children. The contrast between the recently growing fertility rates in Sweden, France and the US with the continuously low fertility in the German-speaking countries can partly be seen as a result of different divorce regimes. Whereas the first group of countries has limited the entitlement to spousal support through alimonies, the second group has institutionalized extensive entitlements for mothers." (author's abstract)