Formalism in the social sciences,rhetorically speaking

Even formal methods in economics, which sociologists have been tempted to adopt, are “rhetorical,” in the sense of “argued to other scholars, not proven forever and ever.” The rhetoric of inquiry, in other words, is not confined to flowery language. Two examples of formal methods that have defective rhetorics are significance tests (in which the sociologists are far ahead) and existence theorems (in which the sociologists are in danger of imitating the economists’ errors). Much effort in economics is spent on a rhetoric without conclusions. A more humanistic economics — or sociology—would examine all the arguments, whether mathematical or not. He is also director of the Project on Rhetoric of Inquiry.     

Ethical turn in the social sciences

This paper discusses the ethical or moral turn of the social sciences, especially in sociology in the works of Zygmunt Bauman and in anthropology in the works of Didier Fassin. These scholars have embarked on relating morals or ethics to their particular area of specialization. We note that their contributions have highlighted the moral or ethical questions in their respective field works and empirical observations and have produced moral or ethical discourses or frameworks in their respective area or field. Ethics or morality (sometimes) morals is not just a theory but also practice in their respective disciplines and advocacies. This moral or ethical practice is translated into questioning our cognitive frameworks and political consequences of globalization or consumerism affecting some groups or individuals in contemporary world. We shall consider morality as human actions while ethics is the reflections on those actions.     

Why the social sciences won't become high-consensus,rapid-discovery science

A research front of rapid discovery, leaving a trail of cognitive consensus behind it, is characteristic of natural sciences since about the 17th century in Europe. The basis of this high-consensus, rapid-discovery science is not empiricism, since empirical research existed in the natural sciences before the 17th century. The key is appropriation of genealogies of research technologies, which are pragmatically manipulated and modified to produce new phenomena; high consensus results because there is higher social prestige in moving ahead to new research discoveries than by continuing to dispute the interpretation of older discoveries. The social sciences have not acquired this pattern of rapid discovery with high consensus behind the research front. Their fundamental disability is not lack of empirical research, nor failure to adhere to a scientific epistemology, nor the greater ideological controversy that surrounds social topics. What is fundamentally lacking in the social sciences is a genealogy of research technology, whose manipulation reliably produces new phenomena and a rapidly moving research front. Unless the social sciences invent new research hardware, they will likely never acquire much consensus or rapid discovery. Possibilities may exist for such development stemming from research technologies in microsociology and in artificial intelligence.     

The imperfect empiricism of the social sciences

The social sciences suffer from a methodological false consciousness that calls into question their progressive nature as cumulative, knowledge-building enterprises. While the practioners of social science believe that they accumulate knowledge through a classical scientific dialectic of hypothesis and evidence (scientific empiricism), they in fact assume their hypotheses to be true images of the nature of the social world, and they resist evidence that gainsays these images (imperfect empiricism). The idea that the social sciences progress, in a linear or dialectical fashion, is itself derived from the perspective of scientific empiricism. In reality the progress of the social sciences is problematic, if the movement of these sciences is viewed in terms of their actual practice of imperfect empiricism. Seen from the latter perspective, the social sciences are—at any particular moment in time—an aggregate of conceptual communities that communicate only imperfectly with each other and that assert the correctness of their point of view while disdaining that of the others. Since the progressive advance of knowledge is uncertain in these circumstances, the question is raised as to why the natural sciences that—according to Kuhn—are also practioners of imperfect empiricism work, while the social sciences apparently do not.     

The social sciences and the population problem

Four essentially independent conceptions of the population problem are visible in current discussions. One is derived from macroeconomics, one from microeconomics, one from the health sciences, and one from ethical concerns about the just relation between man and nature. After describing these conceptions, this paper addresses the population problem principally using the economic definitions. It cites five reasons why discussions of the economic hazards posed by population growth have become markedly less alarmist in the past decade. Failures of highly quantified input-output models to account for human progress are emphasized. The paper presents examples of how technical demography has shed light on the dimensions of and solutions to the population problem and concludes with a brief discussion of contemporary population problems in the U.S.The real world consists not of numbers but of shapes and sizes. It is topological rather than quantitative. Quantification for the most part is a prosthetic device of the human mind, though certainly a very useful one. Anyone who thinks that numbers constitute the real world, however, is under an illusion, and this is an illusion that is by no means uncommon (Boulding, 1980:833).     

Interdisciplinarity and the social sciences: capital, institutions and autonomy

Recent discussions about disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity in the social sciences have tended to map and critique methods, theories and approaches to knowledge production, but spend less time exploring the ways in which institutional constraints and personal trajectories produce different kinds of disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity. In this paper we present findings on interdisciplinarity from UK research undertaken as part of an EC project on knowledge, gender and institutions. The research involved a small survey (n = 14), in-depth interviews (n = 5), two focus groups (n = 7) and observation of social scientists in one university department between June 2006 and April 2007. We reflect on the unwillingness of social scientists to confront the conditions of our academic labour in an account of our difficulties with gaining access and respondents in this study, before moving on to consider some of the different ways in which interdisciplinarity and disciplinary commitments were related to particular forms of scientific and symbolic capital. We go on to discuss this in relation to the autonomy of academic teaching-and-research staff compared to contract researchers, and consider the implications of our findings for the future of interdisciplinarity and the social sciences.     

The social origins of black American doctorates in the sciences

Most sociological studies of U.S. scientists tend to disregard black Americans. This paper seeks to provide some necessary demographic data on black U.S. scientists on which future studies may build. A sample of 557 black scientists responded to a questionnaire designed to provide demographic data. The results show that the typical black U.S. scientist is a male who grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood in a lower middle‐class family with both parents present and usually another sibling or two. After graduating in the top quartile of a predominantly black public high school, he enrolled in a predominantly black college where his academic achievement was above average. When the decision was made to pursue the Ph.D. degree, the preference was a university located in the Midwest. After completing the doctorate the pattern was to return to the South to pursue a career in a predominantly black college.     

Exploring provocation as a research method in the social sciences

Abstract

This paper explores provocation as an approach towards social science research. While routinely used in natural science and arts research, this paper argues provocation might enable the social science researcher to initiate critical reflection amongst participants on issues that are often otherwise overlooked, obscured or accepted as naturalised practice. By assuming the role of provocateur, stimulator and/or agitator, the social science researcher can interrupt the flow of everyday life in order to illuminate and draw attention to complex social issues. Using research interventions that embrace, rather than deny, the socially constructed nature of the research process, provocation provides an alternative to largely non-obtrusive methods favoured in much social science research. This paper concludes by outlining the practical and methodological issues associated with this approach – in particular the complicated ethics of provoking reflection on topics that might not have otherwise come to the participant’s attention.     

The suicide of the social sciences: causes and effects

The social sciences have undergone profound changes. The causes of these changes are many, and in this article we discuss the most important ones. First, we discuss the shift to a situation where the American tradition is the norm and European and national traditions are vanishing. Secondly, we discuss the shift from a focus on the empirical context to a pure internal research focus. These and other changes cause dramatic effects for the social sciences. In our article we analyze these effects on the topics, results, methods and values of the social sciences. We especially focus on the career system and the PhD education. Our conclusion is that changes implemented to gain higher quality have instead caused decreasing quality to a point where the social sciences as a whole are at risk.     

The social capital and mental health of long-term social assistance recipients in Norway

Previous findings have generally demonstrated the positive mental health benefits of social capital. However, the mental health benefits of social capital for social assistance recipients have not been fully demonstrated. This study analyses the mental health benefits of individual-level bonding and individual-level bridging social capital for 551 Norwegian longer-term social assistance recipients. The findings demonstrate that bonding social capital, i.e. contacts with friends and access to social resources, are positively associated with mental health. Of the variables in the study that relate to bridging social capital, social trust and trust towards the social worker particularly show significant associations for mental health. Consequently, it is important that the mental health benefits of various forms of bonding and bridging social capital are acknowledged within social work practices and that social work practitioners actively aim to increase social trust in longer-term social assistance recipients.     

Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda

This article calls for a re-conceptualization of the social sciences by asking for a cosmopolitan turn. The intellectual undertaking of redefining cosmopolitanism is a trans-disciplinary one, which includes geography, anthropology, ethnology, international relations, international law, political philosophy and political theory, and now sociology and social theory. Methodological nationalism, which subsumes society under the nation-state, has until now made this task almost impossible. The alternative, a 'cosmopolitan outlook', is a contested term and project. Cosmopolitanism must not be equalized with the global (or globalization), with 'world system theory' (Wallerstein), with 'world polity' (Meyer and others), or with 'world-society' (Luhmann). All of those concepts presuppose basic dualisms, such as domestic/foreign or national/international, which in reality have become ambiguous. Methodological cosmopolitanism opens up new horizons by demonstrating how we can make the empirical investigation of border crossings and other transnational phenomena possible.     

Unpacking cosmopolitanism for the social sciences: a research agenda

This article calls for a re-conceptualization of the social sciences by asking for a cosmopolitan turn. The intellectual undertaking of redefining cosmopolitanism is a trans-disciplinary one, which includes geography, anthropology, ethnology, international relations, international law, political philosophy and political theory, and now sociology and social theory. Methodological nationalism, which subsumes society under the nation-state, has until now made this task almost impossible. The alternative, a 'cosmopolitan outlook', is a contested term and project. Cosmopolitanism must not be equalized with the global (or globalization), with 'world system theory' ( Wallerstein ), with 'world polity' ( Meyer and others ), or with 'world-society' ( Luhmann ). All of those concepts presuppose basic dualisms, such as domestic/foreign or national/international, which in reality have become ambiguous. Methodological cosmopolitanism opens up new horizons by demonstrating how we can make the empirical investigation of border crossings and other transnational phenomena possible.     

The future of the social sciences and humanities in the science of complex systems

The modern world is characterized by problems that involve systems with social and physical subsystems. They are entangled systems of system of systems with multilevel dynamics. There is no methodology able to combine the partial micro-, meso- and macrotheories that focus on subsystems into a coherent representation of the dynamics of the whole. Policy requires prediction, but the traditional definitions of prediction are not appropriate for multilevel socio-complex systems. Heterogeneous multilevel systems have subsystems that may behave with great regularity over long periods of time, and then suddenly change their behavior due to weak coupling with other subsystems. Thus systems that are usually highly predictable may be subject to rare but extreme events, and this is highly relevant to policy-makers. New ways of thinking are needed that transcend the confines of the traditional humanities, social and physical sciences. Of necessity, this science will be embedded in the design, implementation and management of systems, and therefore the new science will be entwined with policy. Much policy is interventionist experiment. By themselves scientists cannot conduct experiments on socio-complex systems because they have neither the mandate nor the money to design and instrument experiments on the large scale. Policy-makers – elected politicians and their officers – design the future, making it as they believe it ought to be. New kinds of scientific predictions can inform policy but can only be instrumented and tested if there is goodwill between policy-makers and scientists, where scientists are junior partners. Scientists offer policy-makers theories and predictions of social systems based on logical-deductive methods. Policy is generally made on the basis of rhetoric, with the best possible arguments being deployed to support favored conclusions. To convince policy-makers that a particular scientific theory should be used, scientists move from the logical-deductive to the rhetorical. Thus the full theory of a science of complex systems has to provide a logical-deductive metatheory of the rhetorical and logical-deductive systems that make decisions and implement them. Traditional natural and physical science has avoided rhetoric, which is much better understood in the humanities and social sciences. Thus it is concluded that the science of complex systems must embrace the humanities and social sciences not just because their domains of study are relevant but also because their methods are necessary to understand how science and policy work together in complex social systems.