scholarly journals Are Theories Politically Flexible?

2021 ◽  
pp. 073527512110160
Author(s):  
Federico Brandmayr

Social theories are politically flexible if people use them to support opposite political claims. But is this even possible? And what kind of theories have such a property? Moving beyond epistemological debates about neutrality and value-leadenness, this article defends an empirical approach to the study of flexible and rigid political uses of social theories. I identify two main sources of flexibility: endogenous properties of theories, notably their generality, ambiguity, and neutrality, and exogenous features of the contexts in which they are used and of the individuals who use them, notably differences in political and epistemic culture.

2017 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eli J. Finkel ◽  
Paul W. Eastwick ◽  
Harry T. Reis

2019 ◽  
pp. 90-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia S. Pavlova ◽  
Andrey Е. Shastitko

The article deals with the problem of determining market boundaries for antitrust law enforcement in the field of telecommunications. An empirical approach has been proposed for determining the product boundaries of the market in the area of mass distribution of messages, taking into account the comparative characteristics of the types and methods of notification (informing) of end users; the possibilities of switching from one way of informing to another, including the evolution of such opportunities under the influence of technological changes; switching between different notification methods. Based on the use of surveys of customers of sending SMS messages, it is shown that the product boundaries should include not only sending messages via SMS, but also e-mail, instant messengers, Push notifications and voice information. The paper illustrates the possibilities of applying the method of critical loss analysis to determining the boundaries of markets based on a mixture of surveys and economic modeling.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-237
Author(s):  
Eyal Clyne

Drawing on speech acts theory, this article discusses the illocutionary and perlocutionary forces of discursive practices with which certain academic circles seek to discredit the Saidian ‘Orientalism’ framework. Identifying the unusual value attached to Said as object of attachment or detachment, desirability and exceptionality, this analysis turns away from deliberations about ‘orientalism’ as a party in a battle of ideas, and studies common cautionary statements and other responses by peers as actions in the social (academic) world, that enculture and police expectations. Cautioning subjects about this framework, or conditioning its employment to preceding extensive pre-emptive complicating mitigations, in effect constructs this framework as undesirable and ‘risky’. While strong discursive reactions are not uncommon in academia, comparing them to treatments of less-controversial social theories reveals formulations, meanings and attentions which are arguably reserved for this ‘theory’. Conclusively, common dismissals, warnings and criticisms of Said and ‘Orientalism’ often exemplify Saidian claims, as they deploy the powerful advantage of enforcing hegemonic, and indeed Orientalist, views.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen De Cruz ◽  
Johan De Smedt

This paper examines the cognitive foundations of natural theology: the intuitions that provide the raw materials for religious arguments, and the social context in which they are defended or challenged. We show that the premises on which natural theological arguments are based rely on intuitions that emerge early in development, and that underlie our expectations for everyday situations, e.g., about how causation works, or how design is recognized. In spite of the universality of these intuitions, the cogency of natural theological arguments remains a matter of continued debate. To understand why they are controversial, we draw on social theories of reasoning and argumentation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document