The Return to Values in Recent Sociological Theory

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
P. Sztompka
{"title":"The Return to Values in Recent Sociological Theory","authors":"P. Sztompka","doi":"10.1163/EJ.9789004165694.I-450.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author reviews two opposite traditional positions on the role of values and value judgements in sociological research and theory: treating values as a bias interfering in research, or treating values as ideology providing privileged access to knowledge. He traces the recent revival of the debate about valuations, focusing particularly on the claims of the so-called \"public sociology.\" Then the author's own position is outlined based on the fundamental particularity of the social sciences as contrasted with the natural sciences. The old argument that values do not follow from facts is acknowledged as true in the sense of logical deduction, but in the social sciences we encounter different mechanism of implication, which may be called \"sociological syllogism:\" values may follow from facts, and facts may imply values because, on the one hand, people act on their axiological beliefs, and human actions constitute social facts, and on the other hand, social facts (e.g. about poverty, inequality, degradation, crime, terrorism) mobilize moral impulses and valuational commitments. In other words values shape meanings of human actions and resulting social facts, and the knowledge of facts acquires valuational meaning by mobilizing human axiological impulses. The strict separation of facts and values does not work in the social sciences; there is a two-directional link between the two. This opens the possibility for \"sociological ethics\" deriving normative standards of social life from the research results of sociology.","PeriodicalId":44204,"journal":{"name":"Polish Sociological Review","volume":"43 1","pages":"247-261"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Sociological Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/EJ.9789004165694.I-450.13","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The author reviews two opposite traditional positions on the role of values and value judgements in sociological research and theory: treating values as a bias interfering in research, or treating values as ideology providing privileged access to knowledge. He traces the recent revival of the debate about valuations, focusing particularly on the claims of the so-called "public sociology." Then the author's own position is outlined based on the fundamental particularity of the social sciences as contrasted with the natural sciences. The old argument that values do not follow from facts is acknowledged as true in the sense of logical deduction, but in the social sciences we encounter different mechanism of implication, which may be called "sociological syllogism:" values may follow from facts, and facts may imply values because, on the one hand, people act on their axiological beliefs, and human actions constitute social facts, and on the other hand, social facts (e.g. about poverty, inequality, degradation, crime, terrorism) mobilize moral impulses and valuational commitments. In other words values shape meanings of human actions and resulting social facts, and the knowledge of facts acquires valuational meaning by mobilizing human axiological impulses. The strict separation of facts and values does not work in the social sciences; there is a two-directional link between the two. This opens the possibility for "sociological ethics" deriving normative standards of social life from the research results of sociology.
近代社会学理论中的价值回归
作者回顾了价值观和价值判断在社会学研究和理论中的作用的两种相反的传统立场:将价值观视为干扰研究的偏见,或将价值观视为提供特权获取知识的意识形态。他追溯了最近关于估值的辩论的复兴,特别关注所谓的“公共社会学”的主张。然后,根据社会科学相对于自然科学的基本特殊性,概述了笔者自己的立场。在逻辑演绎的意义上,价值不遵循事实的旧论点被认为是正确的,但在社会科学中,我们遇到了不同的暗示机制,这可以被称为“社会学三段论”:“价值可以遵循事实,事实可以暗示价值,因为一方面,人们根据他们的价值论信念行事,人类的行为构成社会事实,另一方面,社会事实(例如关于贫困、不平等、退化、犯罪、恐怖主义)调动道德冲动和价值承诺。换句话说,价值观塑造了人类行为的意义和由此产生的社会事实,而事实的知识通过调动人类的价值论冲动获得了价值意义。事实与价值的严格分离在社会科学中行不通;两者之间存在着双向联系。这为“社会学伦理学”从社会学的研究成果中衍生出社会生活的规范性标准提供了可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信