The Limits of Scholarly Activism

1969 ◽  
Vol 2 (04) ◽  
pp. 582-590
Author(s):  
Steven Muller

It is only fair to begin with an admission that a few years ago I would have regarded the title of this paper as an impossible self-contradiction. Scholarship was one concept; activism another. In those days, the two concepts appeared to me to be incompatible. One could, of course, expect to encounter activists who had been scholars, or who had at least received scholarly training; but one would not expect to find a scholar who was an activist at the same time. In the simplest and most general terms, scholarship implied withdrawal, and activism meant involvement. This, at least, was the tradition with which I was familiar. True, there was such a thing as it applied scholarship, but this applied to subjects with which I was not very familiar, nor was I very comfortable with the concept. It seemed to me that the scholar who was overly concerned with the application of his scholarship was not a true scholar and that he stood in danger of compromising his scholarly objectivity and integrity. Obviously, this was the point of view of a rather standard traditionalist, trained in a study of government which had deep roots in the orthodoxy of the humanities and – in my case — lesser roots in the social sciences, which in my student days still seemed more social than scientific.

Dreyfus argues that there is a basic methodological difference between the natural sciences and the social sciences, a difference that derives from the different goals and practices of each. He goes on to argue that being a realist about natural entities is compatible with pluralism or, as he calls it, “plural realism.” If intelligibility is always grounded in our practices, Dreyfus points out, then there is no point of view from which one can ask about or provide an answer to the one true nature of ultimate reality. But that is consistent with believing that the natural sciences can still reveal the way the world is independent of our theories and practices.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-126
Author(s):  
Drance Elias da Silva

This Article may be situated within the rapport field between Philosophy and Social Sciences, at the search regarding to the concept concerning the Representation. Regarding to Philosophy, under a general view, the concept, concerning Representation, has been, since a long time, understood as a trail which one would get througl reaching to the real and true ones. Representation, as the thought contents expression form had not been known departing from Philosophy as a barrier against the objectivity concerning the knowledge. Representation, in its source, has been constituting itself a cognictive, inmanent reflection, related to the conscience inner subjectivity. But departing from the episthemological point of view, it has been not so easy for the campus concerning the Culture Sciences as a totality. In the theory regarding to knowledge, the Social Sciences campus and, more specifically, in the human life Symbolic dimension constitutive aspects, it has been, often, accepted negatively as an entry door for the histotical social reality. Nowadays, one may conclude that the contents concerning the Culture are deeply rooted within the histotical reality, which may present new dimension the reading regarding to the Symbolical side concerning the human life, under the view regarding to the unseen aspect, such as the intellectualistic Western dominant Culture allows understanding the way which could be in.


1978 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-65
Author(s):  
Aftab Ahmad Cheema

This paper attempts to provide empirical evidence on inter-industry differentials in productivity levels and their growth rates, and the distribution of productivity gains among the principal factors of production" i.e. labour and capital. Hardy any work has been done in Pakistan on providing a satisfactory quantitative measure of productive efficiency of the factors of production in the manufacturing industries. A study of this kind should be important not only from the economic but also from the social point of view because an optimal distribution of total ,gains in productivity is basically an empirical question and can not be discussed in general terms.


Author(s):  
О. О. Стрельнікова

The present article is devoted to the problems of inclusion in modern Ukrainian society. The concept and essence of inclusion are studied from the point of view of the theory of social comprehension (of the essence of inclusive group), dynamics of social structure and social interactions. The inclusion is divided into social and educational forms according to the modern approaches to considering types of inclusion. The main forms of inclusion are analyzed from the point of view of pedagogical and social sciences. Special attention is given to the social inclusion in modern Ukrainian society. The comparative analysis of the categories «integration» and «inclusion» is carried out and the main common and distinctive features of these categories are determined in the article. It is said that social inclusion can be analyzed only in context of social exclusion, because they are both parts of the same social process. The potential of such further analysis are researched. The peculiarities of the process of social inclusion in modern Ukrainian society are analyzed. The main characteristics of social inclusion are described in the article on the basis of analysis of modern scientific literature. Special attention is given to the social inclusion in social work and social science. From the point of view of socio-pedagogical science social inclusion is analyzed as democratic action about comprehension somebody or the whole social group into some activity or cultural process. Social inclusion in modern Ukrainian society becomes social mechanism, some kind of an instrument, aimed at overcoming the barriers and constraints on the path to social well-being, which radically changes the existing state social politics. The results of the research are used in the social work, pedagogical and social sciences.


1986 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Stoutland

AbstractThe reasons-causes debate concerns whether explanations of human behavior in terms of an agent's reasons presuppose causal laws. This paper considers three approaches to this debate: the covering law model which holds that there are causal laws covering both reasons and behavior, the intentionalist approach which denies any role to causal laws, and Donald Davidson’s point of view which denies that causal laws connect reasons and behavior, but holds that reasons and behavior must be covered by physical laws if reasons explanations are to be valid. I defend the intentionalist approach against the two causalist approaches and conclude with reflections on the significance of the debate for the social sciences.


2019 ◽  
pp. 63-85
Author(s):  
J.P.S. Uberoi

This chapter presents a discussion of international intellectual trends in the social sciences, theoretical and empirical studies in India, the question of independence of mind or home rule in intellectual institutions. Following the swarajist project outlined earlier of viewing Europe and its systems of knowledge and practices from an independent Indian point of view, this chapter is in effect a research outline for a new structural sociology in India. We are introduced to structuralism as it exists in the world, its scope and definition and as a methodology for the social sciences. This is followed by the approach to structuralism as scientific theory, method and as philosophical world view. Finally discusses are the principles of structural analysis, structuralism in language, literature and culture, in social structure, with regard to society and the individual, religion, philosophy, politics, sociology and social-anthropology.


Author(s):  
Gabrielle Watson

The principal aim of the chapter is to examine the merits of respect as a concept of critical enquiry. This is an ambitious task, not least because it involves a challenge to the definitional self-evidence of respect to which criminal justice scholars and practitioners routinely subscribe. The chapter pursues three distinct lines of enquiry and reflection. What is respect? The first task is to attend to this deceptively simple question. In so doing, the chapter assembles materials on respect from philosophy and elsewhere in the social sciences. Second, having explored what respect means in general terms—though this is hotly contested—the chapter sketches and filters the most prominent classic and contemporary works into an understanding of respect for criminal justice. By initiating a dialogue with related disciplines in this way, the aim is to build a strong conceptual platform from which to engage with the substantive material on policing and imprisonment in subsequent chapters. Third, the chapter situates respect in criminal justice in contextual and methodological terms. Much of this work must be justificatory both of respect and of my own methodological choices. Having explained in some detail what respect means and why it has been selected for examination, the chapter considers why policing and imprisonment have been selected as contexts for that examination, and how an interpretive approach offers a means by which to conduct that examination.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 226-241
Author(s):  
Jordi Planella-Ribera ◽  
Asun Pié-Balaguer ◽  
Eva Patricia Gil-Rodríguez

In this article, we look at educational forms from the point of view of queer theory. We understand educational forms as techno-scientific practices in the sense defined by Donna Haraway (1997, Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse. Routledge). We contemplate the eminently subjugating nature of educational institutions in industrial and post-industrial societies. Our work is based on the introduction of queer theory into the social sciences and its influence on pedagogy, promoting the avoidance of normalising and exclusive subjectivities. We propose a use and understanding of queer that goes beyond the strictly sexual, in order to go as deeply as possible into a critique of bodily abnormality as a form of construction and remission. We also analyse the role that technology plays in building normality and/or making subversions possible, as well as its consequences for bodies and subjectivities in our modernised society.


Dialogue ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-326
Author(s):  
Stéphane Courtois

AbstractThe general aim of this paper is to question the idea that hermeneutic and critical social sciences have to be conceived as specific embodiments of the scientific enterprise. This idea is rather implicit in Habermas's work, but has its grounds in his thesis about the argumentative unity of all sciences, upheld for the first time in 1973. Such a point of view turns out to be untenable for two reasons. First, the indiscriminating inclusion of the hermeneutic and critical social sciences in scientific enterprise raises problems of consistency with regard to the systematic guidelines of The Theory of Communicative Action. Moreover, the thesis of argumentative unity of the sciences itself is incompatible with Habermas's methodological conception of the role of Verstehen in the social sciences developed in section 1.4 of the book. Finally, the author argues that this conception calls for another understanding of the status and role of the hermeneutic and critical disciplines, which is outlined in some detail.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document