Reading sociological theory against its grain

Q3 Social Sciences
S. Klein, Manuela Boatcă
{"title":"Reading sociological theory against its grain","authors":"S. Klein, Manuela Boatcă","doi":"10.1590/s0102-6992-202237030001en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"he special issue “Reading sociological theory against its grain” proposes to shed light on a number of queries that have been impacting sociology, and more specifically the theoretical debate, in different terms. If the keywords of our call for papers echoed an intellectual (Benjamin, 1980) who himself was not a sociologist stricto sensu , but whose thought straddles and enriched several con - ventional disciplines, this is not a coincidence. Our understanding of sociology as echoed in the call is one of a wider scope with a plurality of theoretical, but also epistemic angles and political commitments. As such, the five essays composing our special issue mirror this effort from different perspectives, as embodied by the au - thors as well as made visible in the various themes they approach. Another two con - tributions that could not be delivered for a number of reasons, not least of which was the impact of the pandemic context, would ideally have widened the scope of the issue even further. Our endeavour explicitly proposed to gather the work of scholars at different stages of their careers and address the historical marginalisa - tion of women and non-white scholars when it comes to theoretical debates. This special issue also takes into account different forms of conceiving theory and approaching it. Hence, our essays draw upon a variety of perspectives, as is the case with the social studies of science, history of sociology, and others that consider an immanent critique of the debates, without ignoring the institutional aspects sur - rounding the production of theory and their subjects. We see a departure from a closed, fixed understanding of what counts as a theoretical debate as an important exercise towards pluralizing theoretical discussions. Therefore we expect each of the texts to open new venues and lead towards further readings and research.","PeriodicalId":35260,"journal":{"name":"Sociedade e Estado","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociedade e Estado","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-6992-202237030001en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

he special issue “Reading sociological theory against its grain” proposes to shed light on a number of queries that have been impacting sociology, and more specifically the theoretical debate, in different terms. If the keywords of our call for papers echoed an intellectual (Benjamin, 1980) who himself was not a sociologist stricto sensu , but whose thought straddles and enriched several con - ventional disciplines, this is not a coincidence. Our understanding of sociology as echoed in the call is one of a wider scope with a plurality of theoretical, but also epistemic angles and political commitments. As such, the five essays composing our special issue mirror this effort from different perspectives, as embodied by the au - thors as well as made visible in the various themes they approach. Another two con - tributions that could not be delivered for a number of reasons, not least of which was the impact of the pandemic context, would ideally have widened the scope of the issue even further. Our endeavour explicitly proposed to gather the work of scholars at different stages of their careers and address the historical marginalisa - tion of women and non-white scholars when it comes to theoretical debates. This special issue also takes into account different forms of conceiving theory and approaching it. Hence, our essays draw upon a variety of perspectives, as is the case with the social studies of science, history of sociology, and others that consider an immanent critique of the debates, without ignoring the institutional aspects sur - rounding the production of theory and their subjects. We see a departure from a closed, fixed understanding of what counts as a theoretical debate as an important exercise towards pluralizing theoretical discussions. Therefore we expect each of the texts to open new venues and lead towards further readings and research.
阅读社会学理论违背了它的本意
《反其道而行之读社会学理论》的特刊以不同的方式,对影响社会学,更具体地说,影响社会学理论辩论的一些问题进行了阐释。如果我们征文的关键词与一位知识分子(Benjamin, 1980)相呼应,他本人严格意义上不是社会学家,但他的思想跨越并丰富了几个传统学科,这不是巧合。我们对社会学的理解,正如这一呼吁所呼应的那样,是一个更广泛的范围,具有多种理论,但也有认识角度和政治承诺。因此,我们特刊的五篇文章从不同的角度反映了这一努力,体现在作者身上,也体现在他们所研究的不同主题上。另外两项贡献——由于若干原因,尤其是由于大流行病的影响而无法提供——理想情况下会进一步扩大这个问题的范围。我们的努力明确提出要收集学者在其职业生涯的不同阶段的工作,并解决在理论辩论中女性和非白人学者的历史边缘化问题。这一期专题还考虑了不同形式的理论构思和接近。因此,我们的文章借鉴了各种各样的观点,就像科学的社会研究,社会学的历史,以及其他考虑辩论的内在批判的情况一样,没有忽视围绕理论生产及其主题的制度方面。我们看到一种对什么是理论辩论的封闭、固定理解的背离,这是一种走向理论讨论多元化的重要实践。因此,我们期望每一个文本都能开辟新的领域,并引导进一步的阅读和研究。
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
Sociedade e Estado
Sociedade e Estado Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The review Sociedade e Estado has been edited by the Department of Sociology at the University of Brasilia since of 1986. In this period, original works related to Social Sciences were published in the following categories: theoretical studies, critical reviews of literature, research reports, technical reports, reviews and notices. Its abbreviated title is Soc. estado, which should be used in bibliographies, footnotes and bibliographical references and strips.
×
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