An overview of the institutionalization process of social sciences in Mexico

2005 ◽  
Vol 44 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 411-472 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Luis Reyna

The article deals with the institutionalization of Mexican social sciences. The central hypothesis is that the state and the social sciences have always been related. Sometimes the link has been strong, at other times weaker, but it has never been absent. Mexico has had a relatively well-defined social policy of support for scientific activities. The most important institutions are sheltered by the state, at least in terms of budget. For this reason, the starting point of the institutionalization process in Mexico can be traced to the end of 1920s. Since then, strong institutions have been built. Without mentioning those dedicated to “hard research”, social science institutions have been important in discovering our past and understanding our present. The present study covers a period of 80 years, although the emphasis is on the period after 1939, the year in which the Social Sciences Research Institute of the National University (ISSUNAM) was founded.

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-192
Author(s):  
Nadia Ruiz

Brian Epstein has recently argued that a thoroughly microfoundationalist approach towards economics is unconvincing for metaphysical reasons. Generally, Epstein argues that for an improvement in the methodology of social science we must adopt social ontology as the foundation of social sciences; that is, the standing microfoundationalist debate could be solved by fixing economics’ ontology. However, as I show in this paper, fixing the social ontology prior to the process of model construction is optional instead of necessary and that metaphysical-ontological commitments are often the outcome of model construction, not its starting point. By focusing on the practice of modeling in economics the paper provides a useful inroad into the debate about the role of metaphysics in the natural and social sciences more generally.


10.1068/d291 ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie W Hepple

Studies on the history of statistics by MacKenzie and on quantitative geography by Barnes have suggested that the lineaments and assumptions of statistical methods such as correlation and regression are closely related to their origin in biometrics and eugenics. This paper challenges that view by examining in detail the work of George Udny Yule. Yule was a colleague of Karl Pearson in the 1890s, but was interested in social science and social policy applications, not eugenics. In the late 1890s he constructed both the theory and application of multiple regression analysis, using geographical data. The paper examines Yule's work and its context, relating it to debates on the history of statistics, and traces the subsequent early diffusion of regression and correlation into the social sciences. The paper concludes by arguing for greater recognition of Yule's pivotal role, and also for further studies on the history of quantitative social science.


1968 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 559-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Nettl

The concept of state is not much in vogue in the social sciences right now. Yet it retains a skeletal, ghostly existence largely because, for all the changes in emphasis and interest of research, the thing exists and no amount of conceptual restructuring can dissolve it. The present article develops a conceptual approach in which no violence is done to historical or empirical fact, but which offers a means of integrating the concept of state into the current primacy of social science concerns and analytical methods. It is hoped that this approach not only will provide a convenient conceptualization, but will contribute to attacking a substantive problem of some consequence. Since the relevant area is potentially huge, no more than a brushstroke configuration can be attempted.


1978 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-448
Author(s):  
Warren E. Miller

One responds to Lee Benson’s conversational gambits with prudence and to his considered formal arguments with great care. If, as in the present circumstance, he is making a “statement,” trepidation is in order. His revolutionary zeal is as formidable as the scholarly understanding which lies behind his advocacy. Moreover, whenever I am tempted to disagree with the manifest content of a Benson argument, I hesitate to express that disagreement because of an experientially based apprehension that I may be totally missing the latent truths that lie within the argument. However, as I recall the SSHA meeting where the presidential address was first presented, I then had the temerity to offer a rather all embracing disagreement with his diagnoses and assessments, if not his prescriptions, where the state of the health of the social sciences is concerned. Emboldened by the realization that I am on record with a public demurral, I will now proceed to restate the nature of my disagreement.


Author(s):  
Luis Sarmiento Loayza

Este artículo es una reflexión sobre ciencias sociales y política social. Se propone que la política social se encuentra desafiada por un mundo social complejo, que plantea exigencias de eficacia que llevan al poder político a fundamentar su accionar en las ciencias sociales. Las ciencias sociales, por su parte, son hoy el resultado de un proceso de diferenciación paradigmático, teórico y metodológico sin precedentes, y de una fuerte tendencia crítica a las teorías y metodologías que se proponen neutralidad axiológica y validez universalista. En este contexto la política social se ve presionada a seleccionar distintos tipos de saber para disponerlos temporalmente según su ciclo de vida. En el diseño y evaluación selecciona un saber de lo general, mientras que en la ejecución selecciona un saber crítico, de lo particular. La disposición temporal de estos saberes aviva la conflictividad propia de las ciencias sociales.Palabras clave: Política social – Accountability – Ciencias sociales – Paradigma A Política Social contemporânea: entre o accountability e a aculturaçãoRESUMOEste artigo é uma reflexão sobre ciências sociais e política social. Propõe-se que a política social é desafiada por um mundo social complexo, que aumenta as exigências de eficácia que levam ao poder político a se justificar no modo de agir nas ciências sociais. As ciências sociais, por sua vez, são agora o resultado de um processo de diferenciação paradigmático, teórico e metodológico sem precedentes, e de uma forte tendência crítica às teorias e metodologias que se propõem uma neutralidade axiológica e validade universal. Neste contexto, a política social é pressionada para selecionar diferentes tipos de conhecimento para dispô-los temporariamente segundo seu ciclo de vida. No desenho e avaliação seleciona-se um conhecimento do geral, enquanto que na execução seleciona-se um conhecimento crítico doparticular. A disposição temporária destes conhecimentos aviva o conflitopróprio das ciências sociais.Palavras-chave: Política Social – Accountability - Ciências Sociais -Paradigma The contemporary Social Policy: Between theaccountability and the acculturationABSTRACTThis article is developed as a reflection on social science and social policy.It is proposed that the social policy is challenged by a complex socialworld, which raises demands for efficiency leading the political power tofound its actions in the social sciences. Today Social Sciences, on the otherhand, are the result of a paradigmatic, theoretical and methodological andunprecedented process of differentiation, and a strong critical tendencyto theories and methodologies that are proposed to axiological neutralityand universal validity. In this context, the social policy is urged to selectdifferent types of knowledge to temporarily dispose them according to theirlife cycle. In designing and evaluating it selects general knowledge, whilefor implementing it selects a particular critical knowledge. The temporaryprovision of that knowledge boosts the conflicts of the social sciences.Key words: Social policy – Accountability – Social sciences – Paradigm


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garret Christensen ◽  
Zenan Wang ◽  
Elizabeth Levy Paluck ◽  
Nicholas Swanson ◽  
David J. Birke ◽  
...  

Has there been meaningful movement toward open science practices within the social sciences in recent years? Discussions about changes in practices such as posting data and pre-registering analyses have been marked by controversy—including controversy over the extent to which change has taken place. This study, based on the State of Social Science (3S) Survey, provides the first comprehensive assessment of awareness of, attitudes towards, perceived norms regarding, and adoption of open science practices within a broadly representative sample of scholars from four major social science disciplines: economics, political science, psychology, and sociology. We observe a steep increase in adoption: as of 2017, over 80% of scholars had used at least one such practice, rising from one quarter a decade earlier. Attitudes toward research transparency are on average similar between older and younger scholars, but the paceof change differs by field and methodology. According with theories of normal science and scientific change, the timing of increases in adoption coincides with technological innovations and institutional policies. Patterns are consistent with most scholars underestimating the trend toward open science in their discipline.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document