社会工作实践中应用知识的一些危险

IF 2.3 Q1 SOCIAL WORK
A. Gupta
{"title":"社会工作实践中应用知识的一些危险","authors":"A. Gupta","doi":"10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The following question was posed, has social science research helped or harmed us? Social work research was used for the purpose of illustration. Three hazards of applying social work basic research were outlined: (1) It is bias (reflecting the left-leaning values of many academics) and leads to the reduction in our freedoms; (2) the social work bias is rooted in a supposed moral high ground called social justice; and (3), the voice of the non-academics becomes deflated, as epistemic elitism is used to foist views upon us by the political class, undermining common cultures. On the heels of the three points, conclusions were offered to consider if any moderating factors exist to address the concern about the loss of freedoms discussed.","PeriodicalId":44255,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Progressive Human Services","volume":"30 1","pages":"183 - 196"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Some dangers of applying knowledge in social work practice\",\"authors\":\"A. Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The following question was posed, has social science research helped or harmed us? Social work research was used for the purpose of illustration. Three hazards of applying social work basic research were outlined: (1) It is bias (reflecting the left-leaning values of many academics) and leads to the reduction in our freedoms; (2) the social work bias is rooted in a supposed moral high ground called social justice; and (3), the voice of the non-academics becomes deflated, as epistemic elitism is used to foist views upon us by the political class, undermining common cultures. On the heels of the three points, conclusions were offered to consider if any moderating factors exist to address the concern about the loss of freedoms discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44255,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Progressive Human Services\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"183 - 196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Progressive Human Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Progressive Human Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2018.1474670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要提出了以下问题:社会科学研究对我们有帮助还是有伤害?社会工作研究被用于说明的目的。概述了应用社会工作基础研究的三个危险:(1)它是偏见(反映了许多学者的左倾价值观),导致我们的自由减少;(2) 社会工作偏见植根于所谓的道德高地,即社会正义;(3)非学术界的声音变得低沉,因为政治阶层利用认知精英主义将观点强加给我们,破坏了共同文化。在这三点之后,还提出了一些结论,以考虑是否存在任何缓和因素来解决对所讨论的自由丧失的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Some dangers of applying knowledge in social work practice
ABSTRACT The following question was posed, has social science research helped or harmed us? Social work research was used for the purpose of illustration. Three hazards of applying social work basic research were outlined: (1) It is bias (reflecting the left-leaning values of many academics) and leads to the reduction in our freedoms; (2) the social work bias is rooted in a supposed moral high ground called social justice; and (3), the voice of the non-academics becomes deflated, as epistemic elitism is used to foist views upon us by the political class, undermining common cultures. On the heels of the three points, conclusions were offered to consider if any moderating factors exist to address the concern about the loss of freedoms discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The only journal of its kind in the United States, the Journal of Progressive Human Services covers political, social, personal, and professional problems in human services from a progressive perspective. The journal stimulates debate about major social issues and contributes to the development of the analytical tools needed for building a caring society based on equality and justice. The journal"s contributors examine oppressed and vulnerable groups, struggles by workers and clients on the job and in the community, dilemmas of practice in conservative contexts, and strategies for ending racism, sexism, ageism, heterosexism, and discrimination of persons who are disabled and psychologically distressed.
×
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