Competition

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Organization Studies ◽  
Anthropology And Education ◽  
Economic Markets ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Fashion Designers ◽  
Narrow Context

The spread of competition into all areas of society is one of the master trends of modern society. Yet, social scientists have played a surprisingly modest role in the analysis of its implications as the discussion of competition has largely been confined to the narrow context of economic markets. This book opens up competition for the study of social scientists. The central message of the book is that competition seems ubiquitous but it should not be taken for granted or be naturalized as an inevitable aspect of human existence. Its emergence, maintenance, and change are based on institutions and organizational efforts, and a central challenge for social science is to learn more about these processes and their outcomes. With the use of a novel definition of competition, more fundamental questions can be addressed than merely whether or not competition works. How is competition constructed—and by whom? Which institutional and organizational foundations need to be considered? Which behaviours result from competition? What are its consequences? Can competition be removed? And, how do these factors vary with the object of competition—be it money, attention, status, or other scarce and desired objects? The chapters in the book investigate these and more questions in studies of competition among and within schools, universities, multinational corporations, auditors, waste-disposal firms, and fashion designers and users. The chapters are written by scholars from several social science fields: management, organization studies, sociology, anthropology, and education.

Reproduction, Production, Social Science, and the Past: A Dissenting Review

1987 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. L. Cornell
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social History ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Historical Sociology ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Past ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Definition Of

Social Scientists use historical data. Historians use social science concepts. The intersection of these two disciplines, history and social science, has been a vibrant source of research questions over the last fifteen years but also raises the issue of how they are to be interrelated. The search for an answer to this question has resulted in the publication of Theda Skocpol’s Vision and Method in Historical Sociology and Olivier Zunz’s Reliving the Past: The Worlds of Social History, which juxtapose the two words in different order. In Skocpol (1984) history modifies sociology; in Zunz (1985) social science modifies history. Both books are collections of articles. Skocpol’s volume contains nine reviews of the work of masters in this field along with an introduction and conclusion by the editor. Zunz’s has an introduction which reviews the literature of social history in five areas of the world: Western Europe, the United States, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and China. This review highlights the strength of Skocpol’s method and of Zunz’s commitment to analysis of non-Western societies but argues that both authors, in limiting their definition of the field to studies of production, ignore an equally vital topic for social analysis of the past, reproduction.

Empirical Foundations of the Common Good

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Human Flourishing ◽  
Catholic Social Thought ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Effective Path

What has social science learned about the common good? Would humanists even want to alter their definitions of the common good based on what social scientists say? In this volume, six social scientists—from economics, political science, sociology, and policy analysis—speak about what their disciplines have to contribute to discussions within Catholic social thought about the common good. None of those disciplines talks directly about “the common good”; but nearly all social scientists believe that their scientific work can help make the world a better place, and each social science does operate with some notion of human flourishing. Two theologians examine the insights of social science, including such challenging assertions that theology is overly irenic, that it does not appreciate unplanned order, and that it does not grasp how in some situations contention among self-interested nations and persons can be an effective path to the common good. In response, one theologian explicitly includes contention along with cooperation in his (altered) definition of the common good.

scholarly journals Concepts of Work in Marx, Durkheim, and Weber

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Ch. Karlsson ◽  
Per Månson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Social Transformation ◽  
Working Life ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Common Definition ◽  
The Family ◽  
Great Transformation ◽  
Central Arena ◽  
Definition Of

The extremely dramatic social transformation – called ‘the great transformation’ by Polanyi (1985) – that the full emergence of capitalism and industrialism meant in Europe led to the birth of modern social theory. The attention of the classics of the studies was taken up by trying to describe, understand, and explain this social change: What is actually going on? What does it mean to people and society? What does the development depend on? And what can be done about all social problems that this new society creates? Changes in working life are at the center of the analyses of social science from the start. Even when the analyses concern religion, culture, music, and the family, the emergence of a labor market, capitalist wage labor, and the concentration of production in large industries provide the reference point. Working life is the central arena of the classics of social theory. There is, however, no common definition of the key concept ‘work’ or ‘labor’ among the classical social scientists – as little as among current ones. Why is that? (...)

Technique Trumps Relevance: The Professionalization of Political Science and the Marginalization of Security Studies

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 377-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Desch
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Political Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Studies ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Self Image ◽  
War Effort ◽  
Narrow Definition ◽  
Basic And Applied Research ◽  
Definition Of

I explain here the disconnect between our discipline's self-image as balancing rigor with relevance with the reality of how we actually conduct our scholarship most of the time. To do so, I account for variation in social scientists' willingness to engage in policy-relevant scholarship over time. My theory is that social science, at least as it has been practiced in the United States since the early twentieth century, has tried to balance two impulses: To be a rigorous science and a relevant social enterprise. The problem is that there are sometimes tensions between these two objectives. First, historically the most useful policy-relevant social science work in the area of national security affairs has been interdisciplinary in nature, and this cuts against the increasingly rigid disciplinary siloes in the modern academy. Second, as sociologist Thomas Gieryn puts it, there is “in science, an unyielding tension between basic and applied research, and between the empirical and theoretical aspects of inquiry.” During wartime, the tensions between these two impulses have been generally muted, especially among those disciplines of direct relevance to the war effort; in peacetime, they reemerge and there are a variety of powerful institutional incentives within academe to resolve them in favor of a narrow definition of rigor that excludes relevance. My objective is to document how these trends in political science are marginalizing the sub-field of security studies, which has historically sought both scholarly rigor and real-world relevance. — Michael Desch.This essay is followed by responses from Ido Oren, Laura Sjobreg, Helen Louise Turton, Erik Voeten, and Stephen M. Walt. Michael Desch then offers a response to commentators.

scholarly journals Concept and Structure of Tolerance (Experience of Theoretical Research)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konstantin Dmitrievich Goncharenko ◽  
Alexander Ardalionovich Taradanov ◽  
Anastasia Aleksandrovna Gizatulina ◽  
Anastasia Aleksandrovna Gizatulina
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Biologically Active ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Multicultural Society ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Individual Measure ◽  
Free Behavior ◽  
Four Levels ◽  
Definition Of

Norms and values in societies are different in civilizational, historical, and ethnical aspect because they were formed according to the specific historical needs of each society. They contain the requirements for both intolerant and tolerant attitude towards ‘others’. The modern concept which social scientists use to try to grasp the sense of “peaceful coexistence in a multicultural society” is the concept of ‘tolerance’. Social science borrowed the concept of tolerance from medicine where tolerance is defined as a neutral or insignificant reaction of a living being to biologically active substances and objects that enter it. In social science itself, tolerance appears as a compromise (conflict-free) behavior in a multicultural society. According to the principles of organization, tolerance is divided into radical (fundamental non-violence) and moderate (civil society). Based on behavior, tolerance represents four levels: 1) unconscious tolerance (symbiosis); 2) conscious (educated) tolerance (indifference, conformism, understanding, consent); 3) self-serving (interaction, cooperation, solidarity); 4) actual (emotional) tolerance (affection, reciprocity, infatuation, love). In total, we get 22 (4 conscious + 3 self-serving + 4 actual) × 2 (radical and moderate) types of tolerance, plus unconscious tolerance/symbiosis. The problem of tolerance is the problem of the correlation of good and harm arising from compromise (conflict-free) behavior in a multicultural society. Therefore, tolerance is an individual measure of good/harm arising from compromise (conflict-free) behavior in a multicultural society. Values can be normative (individual measure of good/harm corresponding to their social measure) and non-normative (individual measure of good/harm not corresponding to their social measure). The absence of a definition of tolerance in modern legislation indicates the normative nature of this value. Consequently, tolerance is a non-normative value of compromise (conflict-free) behavior in a multicultural society. Aim: theoretical study and definition of the concept and structure of tolerance. Keywords: tolerance, value, norm, structure of tolerance

READING THE SECOND SEX IN 1950s AMERICA

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 1041-1062 ◽  
Author(s):  
ROSIE GERMAIN
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Modern Society ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Second Sex ◽  
The 1950S

ABSTRACTSimone de Beauvoir's The second sex was first published in English in 1953, four years after its publication in French. Since the 1970s, many scholars have come to view de Beauvoir as the most important feminist thinker of the twentieth century and consequently to regard the initial American reactions to The second sex, which rarely discussed it in explicitly feminist terms, as showing that de Beauvoir's work had been misunderstood or misrepresented. This article focuses on what American commentators did say about de Beauvoir, rather than what they did not, and it shows that The second sex was quite widely, and often enthusiastically, discussed. Critics often saw de Beauvoir through the prism of social science, in particular anthropology and the ‘science’ of sexology. However, three things impeded a wholly sympathetic reception. First, unlike de Beauvoir, American writers believed that ‘modern’ society, by which they meant America, should combine female emancipation, especially at work, with the preservation of ‘femininity’. Secondly, de Beauvoir's view that ‘woman is made not born’ clashed with biologically determinist ideas popular among American social scientists by the 1950s. Thirdly, and most importantly, American critics were incensed by what they took to be de Beauvoir's denigration of motherhood.

Can Multinational Corporations be responsible for human rights violation of its outsourcee company? Response of national or international law?

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-179
Author(s):  
Alessandro Suppa ◽  
Pavel Bureš
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
International Economy ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Original Question ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Human Rights Violation

SummaryNowadays, an important role in the world is played by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). They hire, produce, and influence the international economy, but also, they exploit, pollute. Their business activities might have a worldwide effect on human lives. The question of the responsibility of MNCs has drawn the attention of many scholars, mainly from the study field labelled “Business and Human Rights”. The present paper does not examine the topic under the same approach. The authors aim at presenting the issue in a broader perspective, exploring the concept of due diligence both in international and corporate law. In this paper, authors strategically use the uniformity of national legislations as a possible and alternative solution to the issue. They are aware of three fundamental factors: 1) the definition of MNCs needs to be as clear as possible, so to avoid any degree of uncertainty; 2) the outsourcing phenomenon interacts with that definition; 3) in case of no possibility to include outsourcing in the definition of MNC, the original question arises in a significant way.

Middle class ideologies: Norms and historical changes.

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Huynh ◽  
Igor Grossmann
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
Central Feature ◽  
Intergroup Dynamics ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Historical Trends ◽  
Societal Norms ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
Behavioral Tendencies ◽  
American Society ◽  
Definition Of

Ever since social scientists became interested in understanding intergroup dynamics, the topic of the “middle class” and its distinction from other groups in society became the central feature of a theoretical and empirical research enterprise. In this overview essay we discuss the beliefs, values and behavioral tendencies attributed to American middle class beliefs, and discuss their implications for understanding class-related norms and values. We end with a reflection over the historical trends that impact societal norms and the definition of middle class in the American society.

Reflections on Local Population Studies and Social Science History

2018 ◽  
pp. 43-51
Author(s):  
Osamu Saito
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Population Studies ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Local Source ◽  
Personal Reflection ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Source Materials

This personal reflection of more than 40 years' work on the supply of labour in a household context discusses the relationship between social science history (the application to historical phenomena of the tools developed by social scientists) and local population studies. The paper concludes that historians working on local source materials can give something new back to social scientists and social science historians, urging them to remake their tools.

ISLAMIC SOCIAL SCIENCES

1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona Abul Fadl
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Social Foundations ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Human Value ◽  
The Social ◽  
Western Values ◽  
Culture Brokers

The need for a relevant and instrumental body of knowledge that can secure the taskof historical reconstruction in Muslim societies originally inspired the da’wa for the Islamizationof knowledge. The immediate targets for this da’wa were the social sciences for obvious reasons.Their field directly impinges on the organization of human societies and as such carries intothe area of human value and belief systems. The fact that such a body of knowledge alreadyexisted and that the norms for its disciplined pursuit were assumed in the dominant practiceconfronted Muslim scholars with the context for addressing the issues at stake. How relevantwas current social science to Muslim needs and aspirations? Could it, in its present formand emphasis, provide Muslims with the framework for operationalizing their values in theirhistorical present? How instrumental is it in shaping the social foundations vital for the Muslimfuture? Is instrumentality the only criteria for such evaluations? In seeking to answer thesequestions the seeds are sown for a new orientation in the social sciences. This orientationrepresents the legitimate claims and aspirations of a long silent/silenced world culture.In locating the activities of Muslim social scientists today it is important to distinguishbetween two currents. The first is in its formative stages as it sets out to rediscover the worldfrom the perspective of a recovered sense of identity and in terms of its renewed culturalaffinities. Its preoccupations are those of the Muslim revival. The other current is constitutedof the remnants of an earlier generation of modernizers who still retain a faith in the universalityof Western values. Demoralized by the revival, as much as by their own cultural alientation,they seek to deploy their reserves of scholarship and logistics to recover lost ground. Bymodifying their strategy and revalorizing the legacy they hope that, as culture-brokers, theymight be more effective where others have failed. They seek to pre-empt the cultural revivalby appropriating its symbols and reinterpreting the Islamic legacy to make it more tractableto modernity. They blame Orientalism for its inherent fixations and strive to redress its selfimposedlimitations. Their efforts may frequently intersect with those of the Islamizing current,but should clearly not be confused with them. For all the tireless ingenuity, these effortsare more conspicuous for their industry than for their originality. Between the new breadof renovationists and the old guard of ‘modernizers’, the future of an Islamic Social Scienceclearly lies with the efforts of the former.Within the Islamizing current it is possible to distinguish three principal trends. The firstopts for a radical perspective and takes its stand on epistemological grounds. It questionsthe compatibility of the current social sciences on account of their rootedness in the paradigmof the European Enlightenment and its attendant naturalistic and positivist biases. Consistencedemands a concerted e€fort to generate alternative paradigms for a new social science fromIslamic epistemologies. In contrast, the second trend opts for a more pragmatic approachwhich assumes that it is possible to interact within the existing framework of the disciplinesafter adapting them to Islamic values. The problem with modern sciene is ethical, notepistemological, and by recasting it accordingly, it is possible to benefit from its strengthsand curtail its derogatory consequences. The third trend focuses on the Muslim scholar, rather ...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document