scholarly journals Construção, usos sociais e busca de legitimidade das tecnologias da geoinformação do INPE | Construction, social uses and legitimation of geioinformational technologies at INPE

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo Augusto Sobral Escada ◽  
Guilherme Reis Pereira
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Scientific Field ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Bruno Latour ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
De Se ◽  
Social Uses ◽  
Independent Model

Resumo Este artigo analisa a experiência de um grupo de cientistas e especialistas do Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE) que buscou consolidar e legitimar, ao longo de duas décadas, um modo próprio de produção de conhecimento científico e tecnológico. Mudanças de paradigma da Política de C&T, nos anos 1990, retiraram o apoio governamental de seus desenvolvimentos, obrigando-os a mudar suas ações estratégicas para que permitisse manter e preservar o modelo endógeno e autônomo de produção do conhecimento. O artigo trabalha com a perspectiva de Pierre Bourdieu (2001), aplicada ao campo científico, e a noção de “translação” de Bruno Latour (2000). A abordagem sociológica contempla e naturaliza os jogos de interesses e disputas no interior do campo científico, bem como destaca o processo de legitimação científica e social do conhecimento. O artigo tem como objetivo principal oferecer uma contribuição aos processos de discussão do modelo das políticas de CTI, principalmente na definição dos conhecimentos a serem produzidos e absorvidos pelo processo de desenvolvimento econômico e social do país. O artigo destaca a necessidade de se ampliar e aprofundar mecanismos democráticos, adotando maior inclusão e transparência nas disputas do campo científico e das políticas de C&T, condições básicas para alcançar um consenso geral que permita emergir um desenvolvimento desejado e planejado por boa parte da sociedade.Palavras-chave Sociologia do Conhecimento, produção de conhecimento, legitimação, democracia e desenvolvimentoAbstract This article analyzes the experience of a group of scientists and specialists from the National Institute of Space Research (INPE) who aimed to consolidate and legitimize, throughout two decades, its own way of producing scientific and technological knowledge. Changes of paradigm in Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Politics, during the 90s, removed governmental support from its developments, compelling scientists to change their strategic actions in order to preserve their endogenous and independent model of knowledge production. The article uses Pierre Bourdieu´s (2001) perspective applied to scientific field and the notion of “translation” from Bruno Latour`s (2000) point of view. The sociological approach contemplates and naturalizes interest games and disputes in the scientific field, as well as emphasizes the scientific and social legitimating process of knowledge. The main objective of this article is to offer a contribution to STI politics model discussion processes, mainly those that define the knowledge produced and absorbed by the Brazilian economic and social development process. The article highlights the necessity of extending and deepening democratic mechanisms, adopting more inclusiveness and transparency into the scientific field and STI politics, basic conditions to reach a general consensus so that a desired and planned development by the majority of society may emerge.Keywords sociology of knowledge, knowledge production, legitimation, democracy and development

Technological Agency in the Co-Constitution of Legal Expertise and the US Drone Program

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 811-831 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANNA LEANDER
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Bruno Latour ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
The Us ◽  
Legal Expertise ◽  
Do So

AbstractOn 30 September 2011, the US citizen Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen in what has become the most controversial incident of US ‘targeted killing’, or, as its critics would prefer, of the US practice of ‘extrajudicial executions’. This controversy over wording expresses a profound disagreement over the legal status of the US drone program. Target killing suggests that the drone program may be legally regulated. Extrajudicial execution suggests that it falls outside the realm of legality. This article does not seek to settle which terminology is the most appropriate. Instead it analyses the legal expertise struggling to do so and its implications. More specifically, it focuses on the processes through which drones constitute the legal expertise that constitutes the drone program as one of targeted killings and of extrajudicial executions; that is, on a process of co-constitution. Drawing theoretical inspiration from and combining new materialist approaches (especially as articulated by Bruno Latour) with the sociological approach of Pierre Bourdieu, the article shows that drones have ‘agency’ in the ‘field’ of legal expertise pertaining to the drone program. Drones are redrawing the boundaries of legal expertise both by making associations to new forms of expertise and by generating technological expert roles. They are also renegotiating what is valuable to expertise. Drones are making both transparency and secrecy core to expertise. However, and contrary to what is often claimed, this agency does not inescapably lead to the normalization of targeted killings. The article therefore concludes that acknowledging the agency of drones is important for understanding how legal expertise is formed but especially for underscoring the continued potential for controversy and politics.

Une sociologie transcendentale?

2010 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 1429-1439
Author(s):  
Jean-Louis Fabiani
Keyword(s):  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Bruno Latour ◽  
Middle Range Theory ◽  
Middle Range ◽  
De Se ◽  
Range Theory ◽  
Sciences Sociales

Une des caractéristiques les plus remarquables de la sociologie en tant que discipline réside dans le fait qu’elle n’a jamais cessé d’être refondée depuis ses multiples, et souvent incertaines, fondations. On pourrait dire que son style épistémologique dominant est celui d’une science toujours déjà là et encore à venir, partagée entre d’infinies potentialités cognitives et une situation effective dans le monde social marquée par la puissance des obstacles qui ne cessent de surgir sur le périlleux chemin de la scientificité. L’idée qui prévaut est celle d’une science jeune, même si ses premières mises en forme ont maintenant un siècle et demi. Jean-Claude Passeron a parfaitement analysé une telle disposition dans Le raisonnement sociologique et il est inutile d’y revenir en détail. L’anxiété épistémologique constitutive d’un savoir dévolu aux formes de sociation (Vergesellschaftung), dont on s’efforce de repérer les régularités et les automatismes tout en faisant droit aux émergences et aux disruptions, a suscité un espace permanent de discussion autour des principes fondateurs, de la définition de l’objet et des protocoles d’observation et d’analyse jusqu’aux modèles plus ou moins explicites de l’action qui permettent de rendre compte des motifs des agents et des institutions ou bien qui s’affranchissent de tout recours à la motivation au profit d’une mécanique sociale. Très souvent, le débat tend à devenir scholastique, au sens que Pierre Bourdieu donnait à ce terme, particulièrement dans ses Méditations pascaliennes. On peut voir les choses de deux façons: la première consiste à considérer que la surchauffe épistémologique ainsi produite est un impédiment pour la recherche empirique à base monographique et qu’elle n’est qu’un cruel indicateur de la minceur des enjeux de la sociologie universitaire. La seconde consiste à reconnaître dans cette négociation indéfinie le site propre des sciences sociales, comme le montrent les débats récurrents sur les pouvoirs explicatifs réflexifs de la structure et de l’agencéité, particulièrement dans la sociologie de langue anglaise. On doit ainsi constater que la pluralité théorique est inhérente à la sociologie. Il est frappant que la discipline se soit régulièrement trouvée de nouveaux pères fondateurs. On pourrait dire ironiquement qu’elle compte aujourd’hui plus de fils fondateurs que de pères fondateurs, instituant une sorte de démocratie séminale où tout le monde a sa chance. Proposer son paradigme semble être une épreuve dans le cursus honorum du sociologue, pourvu qu’il ait un peu d’ambition et qu’il fasse montre de bonnes dispositions lexicographiques. Un sociologue produit d’abord un vocabulaire destiné à signifier le niveau de sa créativité conceptuelle. Pas de grande carrière sans lexique indexé sur un nom propre: middle range theory et obliteration by incorporation pour Robert Merton, habitus-champ-capital pour P. Bourdieu, justification-cité-grandeur pour Luc Boltanski et Laurent Thévenot, objets chevelus et non chevelus et acteur-réseau – au sein d’un dictionnaire et d’un arsenal métaphorique proprement stupéfiant – pour Bruno Latour. Il est remarquable que ces lexiques coexistent sans produire aucun effet de babélisme: tous les protagonistes continuent de se comprendre parfaitement, même s’ils parlent des langages ostensiblement antagonistes. Il serait sous ce rapport fécond de mener une enquête sur les profondes mutations subies par le lexique weberien de la légitimité dont P. Bourdieu a intensifié et universalisé l’usage: les vocabulaires de la justification et de l’artification en constituent des transpositions assez fidèles dans des cadres de référence épistémologiquement hétérogènes. Le livre de Cyril Lemieux, Le devoir et la grâce, pourrait être lu comme un exemple supplémentaire de cette volonté de produire un lexique nouveau. Il pourrait avoir pour sous-titre: Projet d’une sociologie grammaticale. Ce ne serait pourtant pas rendre justice à un travail extrêmement stimulant qui ne se réduit jamais à la proposition d’un nouveau vocabulaire des sciences sociales, mais qui prend au sérieux la nécessité de construire un espace commun qui transcende les démarcations institutionnelles et les paradigmes locaux.

scholarly journals Sociologia do conhecimento e da ciência: da sua emergência a Pierre Bourdieu

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Bandeira Coelho
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Sociology Of Science ◽  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Scientific Field ◽  
Sociological Study ◽  
Max Scheler ◽  
Karl Mannheim ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Critical Notes

O presente artigo tem como principal objetivo demonstrar as características da Sociologia do Conhecimento – emergente nas primeiras décadas do século XX – e da Ciência, destacando os principais conceitos deste campo de estudo sociológico, a partir de Max Scheler, dando ênfase à Sociologia do Conhecimento de Karl Mannheim, à Sociologia da Ciência de Robert Merton e à Sociologia do Campo Científico de Pierre Bourdieu. Ademais, objetiva-se, com isso, tecer algumas críticas acerca da característica desinteressada da sociologia da ciência mertoniana, a partir da ideia bourdieusiana de que a ciência é um campo perpassado por intensos conflitos e tensões em torno dos monopólios de autoridade e do capital simbólico.Palavras-Chave: Sociologia do Conhecimento, Sociologia da Ciência, Robert Merton, Karl Mannheim, Pierre Bourdieu.The main goal of this paper is to demonstrate the characteristics of the Sociology of Knowledge - which emerged in the first decades of the twentieth century - as well as the ones of the Sociology of Science, highlighting the key concepts of the sociological study field, from Max Scheler, emphasizing  Karl Mannheim's Sociology of Knowledge, Robert Merton's Sociology of Science and Pierre Boudireu's Sociology of Scientific Field. Furthermore, it aims to make some critical notes about the uninterested trait of the Merton's Sociology of Science, from Bourdieu's perspective of science as a field interwined by strong conflicts and tensions surrounding the monopoly of authority and symbolic capitalKeywords: Sociology of Knowledge, Sociology of Science, Robert Merton, Karl Mannheim, Pierre Bourdieu.

scholarly journals Sociologia do conhecimento em Mannheim, Bloor e Bourdieu: alguns princípios teóricos e metodológicos

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Hochsprung Miguel
Keyword(s):  
Social Studies ◽  
Social Construction ◽  
Elementary Principals ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Social Study ◽  
Scientific Field ◽  
Karl Mannheim ◽  
The Social

Esse artigo discute as ideias e princípios metodológicos fundamentais da sociologia do conhecimento proposta por Karl Mannheim, David Bloor e Pierre Bourdieu. A compreensão do nexo entre o conhecimento e sua posição social, a concepção da construção social do conhecimento científico e o estudo da razão das lutas travadas no campo científico correspondem a propostas diferentes a respeito do procedimento de pesquisa em sociologia do conhecimento as quais esse artigo pretende esclarecer. Ao mesmo tempo, aproximando-se dos conhecimentos elementares das propostas de cada autor, identificam-se desafios comuns entre os autores ao tentarem compor seu plano metodológico para a sociologia do conhecimento, dentre eles a incontornável condição de reflexividade desses estudos que exige que a própria sociologia submeta-se ao escrutínio da condição social da produção de seu conhecimento. Palavras-chave: Sociologia do Conhecimento; Reflexividade; Objeto e método; Karl Mannheim; David Bloor; Pierre Bourdieu.This article discuss the fundamental ideas of Karl Mannheim, David Bloor, and Pierre Bourdieu about the social study of knowledge. The study of nexus between knowledge and its social position, the conception of social construction of scientific knowledge and the study of struggles in the scientific field correspond to different proposals and procedures in sociology of knowledge discussed by the authors. However, approaching the elementary principals of the sociology of knowledge, we can see a common difficulty in trying to compose a methodological plan for the sociology of knowledge, the inescapable condition of reflexivity in the social studies of knowledge as proposed by Mannheim, Bloor and Bourdieu.Keywords: Sociology of Knowledge; Methods; Concepts, Reflexivity; Karl Mannheim; David Bloor; Pierre Bourdieu.

scholarly journals Social Order and Practical Wisdom of Walking in a Crowd

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 8-29
Author(s):  
Andrei M. Korbut
Keyword(s):  
Social Order ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Joint Production ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Social Transformations ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Everyday Practices ◽  
Phenomenal Field ◽  
Almost All

The article suggests returning to the “crowd” as an object of sociological analysis. Crowds have attracted early sociologists because crowds were visual embodiments of social forces that surpass individuals and also served as a symbol of the profound social transformations which were taking place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Analyzing crowds allowed for the first sociologists (G. Simmel, R. Park, M. Weber, E. Durkheim) to oppose the psychological interpretation of mass social phenomena with a purely sociological approach. However, in the second half of the 20th century sociologists had lost almost all interest in the crowd, as it did not meet the interests of researchers of “large” social structures, nor the interests of the proponents of interactionist approaches. This article shows that the crowd can again be made interesting for sociology if we were to consider it from the point of view of the everyday practices of the participants. In these everyday practices a specific form of phronesis, i.e. practical wisdom, technical skill coupled with moral judgment about which action is good and which is not, is implemented. It is shown here that the study of the practical wisdom of walking in a crowd requires special concepts and methods that can be found in phenomenology and ethnomethodology. The article suggests using three such concepts for the analysis of crowds: phenomenal field, oriented object, and figuration of details. With the help of these concepts, the methods of the crowd’s situated social order production are analyzed in relation to the management of speed and trajectories of movement, following one another, walkers’ stopping and slowing down, and joining the crowd. This analysis shows that the joint production of the crowd’s social order by its participants is a situated practice, i.e. it consists of making the local scenes of everyday life familiar and accountable, and of assessing the local adequacy of the actions performed.

scholarly journals Os diferentes xintoísmos no Japão pós Restauração Meiji

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. e37634
Author(s):  
Leonardo Henrique Luiz
Keyword(s):  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Mircea Eliade ◽  
De Se

O objetivo do presente artigo consiste em propor formas conceituais de se abordar as diferentes expressões dos xintoísmos no Japão. Partimos dos eventos em torno da Restauração Meiji (1868) para sugerir pelo menos três formas de expressão da religião: a primeira enquanto manifestações de figuras sobrenaturais e o culto às divindades locais (神 – kami); a segunda chamada de Jinja Shintō (神社神道) é entendida como abarcando os santuários locais (神社 – Jinja) e as instituições religiosas ligados às famílias de sacerdotes; e a terceira ligada ao Estado japonês (国家神道 – Kōkka Shintō). Do ponto de vista teórico a religiosidade é compreendida a partir dos trabalhos de Mircea Eliade (2010), enquanto o conceito de religião é abordado por meio das elaborações de Pierre Bourdieu (2005). Esses corpos teóricos são flexibilizados a partir das reflexões sobre o que é religião no Japão (SHIMAZONO, 2005) e como o conceito ocidental de religião foi traduzido para o japonês (KRAMER, 2013). Como resultado, busca-se demostrar a existência de vários xintoísmos e que dessa forma, as abordagens sobre a religião devem ser flexibilizadas visando particularidades das manifestações do fenômeno.

scholarly journals Uma análise das relações de poder no campo da segurança

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (38 jan/abr) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luan Carlos Nalin ◽  
Cleber da Silva Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Sao Paulo ◽  
São Paulo ◽  
De Se

O presente artigo buscou analisar as interações entre vigilantes e policiais em situações de conflito nas portas giratórias de agências bancárias. O objetivo foi caracterizar as relações de poder respectivas a esse cenário no qual atores estatais e não-estatais se encontram, assim, contribuir com a ampliação de discussões sobre formas de se prover segurança nas sociedades contemporâneas em que o policiamento é pluralizado. Para isso, o trabalho mobilizou a teoria de Pierre Bourdieu e a noção de “securitização de capital”, bem como análise de acórdãos julgados nos estados de São Paulo e Paraná entre os anos de 2010 e 2012. Os resultados mostram que os policiais utilizam mais capital simbólico para garantir sua autoridade, enquanto os vigilantes e as agências bancárias recorrem ao capital jurídico estritamente para conformar suas condutas. Os bancos também ganharam de forma quase que unânime nos processos julgados, fenômeno este que pode ser pensado junto ao avanço dos serviços de segurança privada, não mais se pautando somente na proteção e segurança executada pelo Estado soberano contra ameaças externas.

scholarly journals Condições sociais de emergência de um subcampo esportivo: o caso do parkour (Social conditions of emergency of a sportive subfield: the case of parkour) (Condiciones sociales de emergencia de un subcampo deportivo: el caso del parkour)

Retos ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 509-516
Author(s):  
Alessandra Vieira Fernandes ◽  
Vinicius Machado de Oliveira ◽  
Giuliano Gomes de Assis Pimentel ◽  
Juliano De Souza
Keyword(s):  
Power Relations ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Pierre Bourdieu ◽  
Social Conditions ◽  
Cultural Goods ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Regulatory Institutions ◽  
Empirical Material

Resumo: Esse artigo analisa a constituição histórica do subcampo esportivo do parkour sob a perspectiva teórica de Pierre Bourdieu. Remete-se à uma abordagem sociológica de caráter descritivo-analítico, cujo material empírico expressa-se na produção online dos praticantes. Em linhas gerais, o processo de desenvolvimento do parkour evidencia a influência da midiatização dos bens culturais e a incorporação de elementos da lógica esportiva que produziram transformações na estruturação da modalidade e no habitus dos agentes. O surgimento de instituições reguladoras, programas de profissionalização e competições introduziram e acentuaram uma distinção entre amadores e profissionais, configurando relações de poder no interior da prática. Abstract: This article analyzes the historical constitution of the sports subfield of parkour under the theoretical perspective of Pierre Bourdieu. It refers to a sociological approach of a descriptive-analytical character, whose empirical material is expressed in the online production of practitioners. In general, the development process of parkour evidences the influence of the mediatization of cultural goods and the incorporation of elements of the sports logic that have produced transformations in the structure of the modality and in the habitus of the agents. The emergence of regulatory institutions, professionalization programs and competitions have introduced and accentuated a distinction between amateurs and professionals, configuring power relations within the practice.Resumen: Este artículo analiza el desarrollo histórico del subcampo deportivo del parkour de acuerdo con la perspectiva teórica de Pierre Bourdieu. Se hace referencia a un enfoque sociológico de carácter descriptivo-analitico, cuyo material empírico se expresa en la producción online de los practicantes. En general, el proceso de desarrollo del parkour muestra la influencia de la cobertura mediática de los bienes culturales y la incorporación de elementos de la lógica de los deportes que produjeron cambios en la estructura de la modalidad y en el habitus de los agentes. La aparición de instituciones reguladoras, programas de formación profesional y competiciones, introdujeron y ampliaron la distinción entre los amateurs y profesionales, estableciendo relaciones de poder dentro de la práctica.

scholarly journals The problem of studying the Montenegrin legislation of the early 20th century: normative and sociological approaches

2020 ◽  
pp. 267-282
Author(s):  
Varvara B. Khlebnikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Legal Science ◽  
Sociological Approaches ◽  
Legislative Activities

The author of the article considers the development of Montenegrin law in the 19th - early 20th centuries and tries to assess the results of the legislative activities of the Montenegrin authorities, that issued new regulations and carried out large-scale codification work on regular basis. From the point of view of the normative approach, widely used in legal science, these activities seemed quite successful; the laws that met urgent needs of the state's development were created within short periods of time. However according to the sociological approach, one has to admit that the significant part of Montenegrin legislation was just a formality and was hardly implemented in practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document