Infrastrukturen des Kollektiven: alte Medien – neue Kollektive?

Author(s):  
Urs Stäheli

Der Begriff des Kollektivs ist, obgleich im Zentrum der Sozialwissenschaften, meist nur im Rahmen einer für abweichendes Verhalten zuständigen Spezialsoziologie als »kollektives Verhalten« konzipiert worden. Der Aufsatz schlägt eine Re-Lektüre dieser Soziologie (insbesondere von Herbert Blumer) vor, um das Zustandekommen von Kollektivität zu denken. Mit Hilfe einer Lektüre von Walt Whitman, der als lyrische und journalistische Inspirationsquelle für die frühe amerikanische Soziologie wichtig war, wird ein Konzept der materialen und medialen Infrastrukturen (insbesondere von Transportmedien wie der Fähre) gewonnen, das gerade auch für die heutige Verschränkung von Kollektivität und Infrastruktur aussagekräftig ist. </br></br>Although it is central to the social sciences, the notion of the collective has been elaborated primarily in fields of study which are concerned with deviant behavior, and then only in the sense of »collective behavior.« In order to consider the emergence of collectivity, the present paper suggests a re-reading of this sociology (especially of Herbert Blumer). By means of a reading of Walt Whitman, who was important as a lyrical and journalistic source of inspiration to early American sociology, a concept of material and medial infrastructures (particularly transport media such as the ferry) is obtained, which is also significant for the current theoretical interweaving of collectivity and infrastructure.

2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Rynkiewich

Abstract There was a time when mission studies benefitted from a symbiotic relationship with the social sciences. However, it appears that relationship has stagnated and now is waning. The argument is made here, in the case of cultural anthropology both in Europe and the United States, that a once mutually beneficial though sometimes strained relationship has suffered a parting of the ways in recent decades. First, the article reviews the relationships between missionaries and anthropologists before World War II when it was possible to be a ‘missionary anthropologist’ with a foot in both disciplines. In that period, the conversation went two ways with missionary anthropologists making important contributions to anthropology. Then, the article reviews some aspects of the development of the two disciplines after World War II when increasing professionalism in both disciplines and a postmodern turn in anthropology took the disciplines in different directions. Finally, the article asks whether or not the conversation, and thus the cross-fertilization, can be restarted, especially since the youngest generation of anthropologists has recognized the reality of local Christianities in their fields of study.


2012 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Alexander Bentley ◽  
Michael J. O’Brien

Abstract There is a long and rich tradition in the social sciences of using models of collective behavior in animals as jumping-off points for the study of human behavior, including collective human behavior. Here, we come at the problem in a slightly different fashion. We ask whether models of collective human behavior have anything to offer those who study animal behavior. Our brief example of tipping points, a model first developed in the physical sciences and later used in the social sciences, suggests that the analysis of human collective behavior does indeed have considerable to offer [Current Zoology 58 (2): 298–306, 2012].


Author(s):  
José Hernández-Ascanio

La innovación social se ha constituido en uno de los ámbitos de estudio más activos no sólo en el campo de investigación sobre la innovación, sino de las ciencias sociales en general. Desafortunadamente, ese interés no ha conducido al desarrollo de una teoría de la innovación social. En la actualidad es posible identificar un intenso debate teórico en torno a tres áreas de interés fundamentales: la formulación de definiciones y conceptos sobre qué es la innovación social, la identificación de las etapas a partir de las cuales discurren los procesos de innovación social y, por último, el intento de elaborar modelos integradores sobre dichos fenómenos. Se pueden constatar diferentes esfuerzos de articulación de estos elementos focales. Uno nuevo que se abre es la reflexión sobre el carácter praxeológico de la innovación social, más allá de un conjunto de metaasunciones, elementos explicativos u objetivos de investigación. En la innovación social se reconocen significativos paralelismos con los modelos investigación participativa y de sociopraxis, de tal forma que se hace necesario elaborar la pregunta acerca de si es posible considerar la innovación social como un método propio de este tipo de metodología de indagación colectiva. El presente trabajo propone una discusión en este sentido, utilizando para ello una estrategia hermenéutica aplicada a una revisión sistemática e integrativa de la bibliografía especializada. En el desarrollo disciplinar en torno al fenómeno de la innovación social es posible identificar fundamentos epistemológicos que permiten caracterizarlo como un método propio de investigación participativa y de sociopraxis social específica para la generación de productos culturales de alto impacto social. Sin embargo, la dispersión y la debilidad conceptual y metodológica en torno a la innovación social se presentan como principal obstáculo para la consolidación de la misma como método.Social innovation has become one of the most active fields of study not only in the field of research on innovation but also in the social sciences in general. Unfortunately, that interest has not led to the development of a theory of social innovation. Currently, it is possible to identify an intense theoretical debate around three fundamental areas of interest: the formulation of definitions and concepts about what social innovation is, the identification of the stages from which social innovation processes run and, finally, the attempt to elaborate integrative models on these phenomena. Different articulation efforts of these focal elements can be verified. A new one that is opening is the reflection on the praxeological character of social innovation, beyond a set of meta-assumptions, explanatory elements or research objectives. In social innovation, significant parallels are recognized with the participatory research and sociopraxis models, in such a way that it is necessary to elaborate the question about whether it is possible to consider social innovation as a method of this type of collective inquiry methodology . The present work proposes a discussion in this sense, using a hermeneutical strategy applied to a systematic and integrative review of the specialized bibliography. In the disciplinary development around the phenomenon of social innovation, it is possible to identify epistemological foundations that allow it to be characterized as its own method of participatory research and specific social sociopraxis for the generation of cultural products with high social impact. However, the dispersion and conceptual and methodological weakness around social innovation are presented as the main obstacle to consolidating it as a method. 


1970 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad Alan Goldberg

The Polish Peasant in Europe and America, a sprawling masterpiece co-authored by W.I. Thomas and F. Znaniecki and published in five volumes between 1918 and 1921, is a widely acknowledged classic of interwar sociology. One of its signal contributions, and a key reason for its classic status, is what James Carey, in his book on the Chicago school of sociology, calls the social disorganization paradigm. In the United States, the Chicago school of sociology subsequently applied this paradigm to interpret a variety of urban social problems in the 1920s and early 1930s, and it remains influential in studies of crime and violence in American sociology today. Chad Alan Goldberg, Chłop polski w Europie i Ameryce jako studium inkorporacji grup społecznych i budowania wspólnoty narodowej [The Polish Peasant in Europe and America as a Study of Civil  Incorporation and Nation-Building] edited by M. Nowak, „Człowiek i Społeczeństwo” vol. XLVII: „Chłop polski w Europie i Ameryce” po stu latach [Polish peasant in Europe and America after one hundred years], Poznań 2019, pp. 143–159, Adam Mickiewicz University. Faculty of Social Sciences Press. ISSN 0239-3271


2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 627-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlene B. Tickner

This article analyzes the core–periphery dynamics that characterize the International Relations discipline. To this end, it explores general insights offered by both science studies and the social sciences in terms of the intellectual division of labor that characterizes knowledge-building throughout the world, and the social mechanisms that reproduce power differentials within given fields of study. These arguments are then applied to International Relations, where specific factors that explain the global South’s role as a periphery to the discipline’s (mainly US) core and the ways in which peripheral communities place themselves vis-à-vis International Relations’ (neo)imperialist structure are both explored.


Author(s):  
Ola Hall ◽  
Ibrahim Wahab

Drones are increasingly becoming a ubiquitous feature of society. They are being used for a multiplicity of applications for military, leisure, economic, and academic purposes. Their application in the latter, especially as social science research tools has seen a sharp uptake in the last decade. This has been possible due, largely, to significant developments in computerization and miniaturization which have culminated in safer, cheaper, lighter, and thus more accessible drones for social scientists. Despite their increasingly widespread use, there has not been an adequate reflection on their use in the spatial social sciences. There is need a deeper reflection on their application in these fields of study. Should the drone even be considered a tool in the toolbox of the social scientist? In which fields is it most relevant? Should it be taught as a course in the universities much in the same way that geographic information system (GIS) became mainstream in geography? What are the ethical implications of its application in the spatial social science? This paper is a brief reflection on these questions. We contend that drones are a neutral tool which can be good and evil. They have actual and potential wide applications in academia but can be a tool through which breaches in ethics can be occasioned given their unique abilities to capture data from vantage perspectives. Researchers therefore need to be circumspect in how they deploy this powerful tool which is increasingly becoming mainstream in the social sciences.


Author(s):  
Roberto Blancarte

Latin American sociology of religion is a relatively young discipline, although institutionally speaking, it has not lagged as far behind European sociology as we usually think. There is, in fact, an early link between Continental Europe and Latin America in the development of institutions dedicated to the study of religions. They have witnessed an incredible expansion, particularly over the past three decades. The author offers a general panorama of the trajectory of the subdiscipline and the development of a robust academic field. The reasons for this intellectual explosion go from the development of a scientific institutional framework for social sciences in emerging economies to the changing structure of religions and the social awareness of a historical plurality of beliefs in Latin America.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document