共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
Christian Joppke 《Theory and Society》2007,36(4):313-342
Neutrality has been the classic answer of the liberal state to religious and cultural difference. A number of multicultural
critics recently debunked it as “myth” and group power in disguise. Comparing Islamic headscarf laws in France and Germany,
I argue that neutrality is more complex and multifaceted than this. The comparison shows that neutrality leaves space for
particularistic and universalistic, unity- and rights-oriented stances, the first located in the sphere of democratic politics, the second in the legal–constitutional sphere.
Recent headscarf laws may then be understood as political backlash against the rights-oriented neutrality that has emerged
in the legal spheres of both countries.
Christian Joppke is Professor of Politics in the Graduate School of Government, American University of Paris. His most recent book is “Selecting by Origin: Ethnic Migration in the Liberal State” (Harvard University Press, 2005). Currently he is writing a book on citizenship and immigration for Polity Press. Together with John Torpey (CUNY, Graduate Center), he is also conducting research on the institutional accommodation of Islam in North America and Western Europe. This research is funded by the Swiss Foundation for Population, Migration and Environment (PME) and the International Metropolis Project. 相似文献
Christian JoppkeEmail: |
Christian Joppke is Professor of Politics in the Graduate School of Government, American University of Paris. His most recent book is “Selecting by Origin: Ethnic Migration in the Liberal State” (Harvard University Press, 2005). Currently he is writing a book on citizenship and immigration for Polity Press. Together with John Torpey (CUNY, Graduate Center), he is also conducting research on the institutional accommodation of Islam in North America and Western Europe. This research is funded by the Swiss Foundation for Population, Migration and Environment (PME) and the International Metropolis Project. 相似文献
2.
The current crisis of neoliberalism is calling into question the relevance of key international institutions. We analyze the
origins, nature, and possible impacts of the crisis through comparing two such institutions: the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Both originated in the post-World War II U.S.-led hegemonic order and were transformed
as part of the transition to global neoliberalism. We show that while the IMF and the WTO have been part of the same hegemonic
project, their distinct institutional features have put them on significantly different trajectories. Historical differences
in the two institutions’ systems of rules have placed the IMF in a more vulnerable position than the WTO, which provides clues
to the future contours of global economic governance.
Nitsan Chorev is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Brown University. She is the author of Remaking U.S. Trade Policy: from Protectionism to Globalization (Cornell University Press, 2007), and is now working on a book on the global politics of health. Sarah Babb is Associate Professor of Sociology at Boston College. She is the author of Behind the Development Banks: Washington Politics, World Poverty, and the Wealth of Nations (University of Chicago Press, 2009), which explores the impact of American politics on the World Bank and regional development institutions. 相似文献
Nitsan Chorev (Corresponding author)Email: |
Sarah BabbEmail: |
Nitsan Chorev is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Brown University. She is the author of Remaking U.S. Trade Policy: from Protectionism to Globalization (Cornell University Press, 2007), and is now working on a book on the global politics of health. Sarah Babb is Associate Professor of Sociology at Boston College. She is the author of Behind the Development Banks: Washington Politics, World Poverty, and the Wealth of Nations (University of Chicago Press, 2009), which explores the impact of American politics on the World Bank and regional development institutions. 相似文献
3.
Joel Stillerman 《Qualitative sociology》2006,29(4):507-530
Recent discussions of contentious politics have focused on struggles in and over space and place. This article builds upon
these concerns by using ethnographic, interview, and documentary data to analyze the spatial politics of street market vendors
in Santiago, Chile. Drawing upon Lefebvre’s concepts of perceived, conceived, and lived space as well as ideas drawn from
research on space and protest, I show how street market vendors build upon spatial routines, a sense of place, political alliances,
and scale jumping in their self-defense strategies at the local, national, and international scales. The findings illustrate
Lefebvre’s argument that the advance of abstract space (constructed by dominant economic and political elites) provokes resistance
by groups who defend and seek to reconstruct lived space.
相似文献
Joel StillermanEmail: |
4.
Larissa Buchholz 《Theory and Society》2006,35(4):481-490
This is a discussion of a book by Kathryn Linn Geurts, Culture and the Senses. Bodily Ways of Knowing in an African Community, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002; and a book by Judith Farquhar, Appetites. Food and Sex in Post-Socialist China, Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press, 2002.
相似文献
Larissa BuchholzEmail: |
5.
Extant theoretical insights—mostly derived from studies of prominent revolutions in large countries—are less useful when applied
to the unfolding of revolutions in small states. To understand why revolutions happened in the latter, a framework is needed
that takes into account geography. For small states, geography is more than dotted lines on maps. It is the source of intervention
and vulnerability. Deeply mired in history and memory, states’ geographies shape their distinctive identities and have great
impacts on national political trajectories, including revolutions. Thus, to provide understanding of revolutions in these
countries, no analysis could be complete without taking into account their places, understood in physical, ideational, and
historical terms, within their regions and the world. The case of Laos is used to suggest a geographical analysis of revolutions
that provides overlooked insights into the origins, processes, and outcomes of revolutions in small, vulnerable states.
Anoulak Kittikhoun is a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the Graduate Center, City University of New York. He teaches Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York and is Research Associate at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. His research interests are in East Asian politics and history, revolutions and contentious politics, political and economic development, international relations, and regional integration. He is working on a dissertation that examines the linkage between regime legitimacy and regime stability and change in Singapore and Taiwan. 相似文献
Anoulak KittikhounEmail: |
Anoulak Kittikhoun is a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the Graduate Center, City University of New York. He teaches Political Science at Brooklyn College, City University of New York and is Research Associate at the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. His research interests are in East Asian politics and history, revolutions and contentious politics, political and economic development, international relations, and regional integration. He is working on a dissertation that examines the linkage between regime legitimacy and regime stability and change in Singapore and Taiwan. 相似文献
6.
By virtually dominating French intellectual life (literature, philosophy, culture) during the early post-World War II period,
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) embodied what Pierre Bourdieu calls a “total intellectual” – one who responds to and helps frame
public debate on all the intellectual and political issues of the day. During his lifetime and even after his death in 1980,
Sartre’s thinking and political engagements provoked sharp reactions, both positive and negative, in France and abroad. Marxism,
decolonization struggles, and violence are three key themes on which Sartre’s public positions continue to generate considerable
debate – a debate that remains relevant today.
David L. Swartz is Assistant Professor of Sociology and teaches in the Core Curriculum at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press, 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004). His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Swartz is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. Vera L. Zolberg is Professor of Sociology at the New School for Social Research, New York City, where she has taught for over 20 years. In addition, she has taught at Purdue University, was visiting lecturer at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, held the Chair in Sociology of Art, University of Amsterdam, as Boekmanstichting Professor, and was visiting Research Associate at the CNRS in Paris. Zolberg has served as President of the Research Committee in the Sociology of the Arts of the International Sociological Association, and Chair of the Culture Section of the American Sociological Association. Among her publications are Outsider Art: Contesting Boundaries in Contemporary Culture, with J.M. Cherbo (Cambridge University Press, 1997); and Constructing a Sociology of the Arts (Cambridge University Press, 1990). She is co-editor, with David Swartz, of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004), and author of many articles. Her research interests include: contemporary and historical cultural policy and politics, urbanism and culture, museums, African art, and the sociology of collective memory. Zolberg is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. 相似文献
David L. Swartz (Corresponding author)Email: |
Vera L. ZolbergEmail: |
David L. Swartz is Assistant Professor of Sociology and teaches in the Core Curriculum at Boston University. He is the author of Culture & Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (University of Chicago Press, 1997) and co-editor (with Vera L. Zolberg) of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004). His research interests include the study of elites and stratification, education, culture, religion, and social theory and he is currently writing a book on the political sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Swartz is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. Vera L. Zolberg is Professor of Sociology at the New School for Social Research, New York City, where she has taught for over 20 years. In addition, she has taught at Purdue University, was visiting lecturer at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, held the Chair in Sociology of Art, University of Amsterdam, as Boekmanstichting Professor, and was visiting Research Associate at the CNRS in Paris. Zolberg has served as President of the Research Committee in the Sociology of the Arts of the International Sociological Association, and Chair of the Culture Section of the American Sociological Association. Among her publications are Outsider Art: Contesting Boundaries in Contemporary Culture, with J.M. Cherbo (Cambridge University Press, 1997); and Constructing a Sociology of the Arts (Cambridge University Press, 1990). She is co-editor, with David Swartz, of After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004), and author of many articles. Her research interests include: contemporary and historical cultural policy and politics, urbanism and culture, museums, African art, and the sociology of collective memory. Zolberg is a Senior Editor of Theory and Society. 相似文献
7.
Tuong Vu 《Theory and Society》2006,35(4):393-419
The study of mass contentious politics in Southeast Asia has accumulated significant knowledge over the last 40 years. This politics is instructive because it presents distinctive problems for analysis whose solutions will be useful to future analysts there and elsewhere. Two areas of knowledge where this literature has made special contributions are peasant resistance and the politics of insurgency and counterinsurgency. In addition, the peculiarities of the scholarship on this topic offer an opportunity to engage two different debates. First, because of the diverse methods employed to tackle this topic, the literature is useful for evaluating claims often made by partisans to methodological debates that only one’s own method can accumulate knowledge while others cannot. Second, given the high geopolitical stake Southeast Asia once held for the United States in its fight against world communism, the scholarship on contentious mass politics in this region provides an appropriate test case for the common argument that postwar American scholarship has been dominated by American “imperial designs.” This article examines the different genres of analysis in the literature and shows how these genres hold different normative and ontological assumptions, conceptualize problems differently, and accumulate knowledge in different modes. A key finding of the essay is that knowledge accumulation by different genres has experienced cycles of growth and exhaustion. The evolution of these genres indicates the often neglected fact that knowledge accumulation consumes exhaustible knowledge resources that need to be replenished. The changing fortunes of the genres with different normative orientations also suggest a loose link between scholarship on this topic and broad ideological shifts in the United States, although “imperial interests” did not always prevail as often claimed.
相似文献
Tuong VuEmail: |
8.
The inverse plurality rule—an axiomatization 总被引:1,自引:1,他引:0
Under the ‘inverse plurality rule’, voters specify only their least preferred alternative. Our first result establishes that
this rule is the only scoring rule that satisfies the minimal veto condition (MV). We then prove that the inverse plurality
rule is characterized by MV and the four well known conditions that characterize scoring rules; namely, Anonymity (A), Neutrality
(N), Reinforcement (RE) and Continuity (CO). Our new characterization result is related to the characterizations of approval
voting and of the widely used plurality rule. We finally show how the axiomatization of the inverse plurality rule can be
extended to the axiomatization of elementary scoring rules (vote for t-alternatives scoring rules).
We are indebted to two anonymous referees for their most useful comments.
相似文献
Eyal Baharad (Corresponding author)Email: |
Shmuel NitzanEmail: |
9.
Peter N. Stearns 《Theory and Society》2007,36(4):373-379
This is a discussion of two books by Cas Wouters, Sex and Manners: Female Emancipation in the West 1890–2000 (London: Sage, 2004), and Informalization: Manners and Emotions since 1890 (Sage, forthcoming 2007, English version).
相似文献
Peter N. StearnsEmail: |
10.
Mirella Landriscina 《Qualitative sociology》2006,29(4):447-466
Through a case study of a leading service provider organization in Philadelphia, this paper explores the advocacy work of
a publicly funded, professionalized, institutionalized nonprofit organization. In this article I relate how in the spring
of 2002, staff at the organization responded to a recurring political issue: local business groups were again calling for
official action against “aggressive panhandlers” in the downtown district. I use ethnographic and historical data to show
that the organization’s institutionalization and ties to the public sector have allowed staff to develop resources and skills
for being both contentious claim-makers and influential actors in the institutional political arena.
相似文献
Mirella LandriscinaEmail: |
11.
Jaeeun Kim 《Theory and Society》2009,38(2):133-164
The burgeoning literature on transborder membership, largely focused on the thickening relationship between emigration states
in the South and the postwar labor migrant populations and their descendants in North America or Western Europe, has not paid
due attention to the long-term macroregional transformations that shape transborder national membership politics or to the
bureaucratic practices of the state that undergird transborder claims-making. By comparing contentious transborder national
membership politics in South Korea during the Cold War and Post-Cold War eras, this article seeks to overcome these limitations.
In both periods, the membership status of colonial-era ethnic Korean migrants in Japan and northeast China and their descendants
was the focus of contestation. The distinctiveness of the case—involving both a sustained period of colonial rule and a period
of belated and divided nation-state building interwoven with the Cold War—highlights the crucial importance of three factors:
(1) the dynamically evolving macro-regional context, which has shaped transborder national membership politics in the region
in distinctive ways; (2) the essentially political, performative, and constitutive nature of transborder nation-building;
and (3) the role of state registration and documentation practices in shaping the contours of transborder national membership
politics in the long run. By incorporating Korea—and East Asia more broadly—into the comparative study of transborder nation-building,
this article also lays the groundwork for future cross-regional comparative historical studies.
Jaeeun Kim is a Ph.D. Candidate in Sociology at UCLA. Her scholarly interests include state-building, citizenship, nationalism, and international migration in East Asia from a comparative historical perspective. She is currently conducting dissertation fieldwork in Korea, northeast China, and Japan. 相似文献
Jaeeun KimEmail: |
Jaeeun Kim is a Ph.D. Candidate in Sociology at UCLA. Her scholarly interests include state-building, citizenship, nationalism, and international migration in East Asia from a comparative historical perspective. She is currently conducting dissertation fieldwork in Korea, northeast China, and Japan. 相似文献
12.
American organizational theorists have not taken up the call to apply Bourdieu’s approach in all of its richness in part because,
for better or worse, evidentiary traditions render untenable the kind of sweeping analysis that makes Bourdieu’s classics
compelling. Yet many of the insights found in Bourdieu are being pursued piecemeal, in distinct paradigmatic projects that
explore the character of fields, the emergence of organizational habitus, and the changing forms of capital that are key to
the control of modern organizations. A number of these programs build on the same sociological classics that Bourdieu built
his own theory on. These share the same lineage, even if they were not directly influenced by Bourdieu.
Frank Dobbin is Professor of Sociology at Harvard University. His The New Economic Sociology: A Reader (Princeton University Press 2004) traces modern paradigms in economic sociology to their origins in sociological classics. His Inventing Equal Opportunity, chronicling the construction of corporate anti-discrimination strategies by human resources professionals, will be published by Princeton University Press in 2008. 相似文献
Frank DobbinEmail: |
Frank Dobbin is Professor of Sociology at Harvard University. His The New Economic Sociology: A Reader (Princeton University Press 2004) traces modern paradigms in economic sociology to their origins in sociological classics. His Inventing Equal Opportunity, chronicling the construction of corporate anti-discrimination strategies by human resources professionals, will be published by Princeton University Press in 2008. 相似文献
13.
Focusing on the interactional dynamics of movements, we find that two constructs, voice and agency are critical to the development of a sense of “groupness” and can aid social movement actors in accomplishing desired goals.
Voice and agency are accomplished when movement actors engage in various processes such as planning and strategizing, completion
of goal-oriented tasks and other unifying activities. We examine four social movement organizations operating in separate
movement contexts with different outcomes: contested gay politics in Cincinnati, Ohio and grassroots feminism in Cleveland,
Ohio and New York City, New York. We find that groups will have a better chance at achieving their goals if members are able
to create a unified voice, and if leaders include and draw from the strengths of those they recruit, thus allowing a sense
of agency.
相似文献
Jo RegerEmail: |
14.
Basant K. Kapur 《Social Choice and Welfare》2005,25(1):155-171
In his book Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of Excess (1999) economist Robert Frank describes a number of significant trends in the U.S., and to a lesser extent in other industrial
economies, since the late 1970s: rapidly rising incomes, for those at the upper end of the income scale, increasing hours
of work, and increased consumerism (share of consumption of ‘status goods’). We demonstrate that the first development can parsimoniously account for the latter two.
Our novel specification of the utility function simultaneously incorporates a relative-consumption effect for status goods
and non-homotheticity of preferences between status and non-status goods, and we also allow for endogenous labour–leisure
choice. It is possible that well-being has declined, notwithstanding the faster income growth, or at least not risen pari passu with the growth in earnings. Comparisons are made with other studies, and policy implications briefly discussed.
相似文献
Basant K. KapurEmail: |
15.
Like all new research fields, the “new economic sociology” was produced by the redeployment of relatively diverse researchers
under a single academic label. Academic entrepreneurs in the second half of the 1980s took up the traditional term of the
European “founding fathers” claiming they were renewing the discipline while distinguishing themselves from (1) the old homegrown
denomination “economy and society,” (2) anti-disciplinary currents such as neo-Marxism, and (3) interdisciplinary movements
like “socioeconomics.” The relative unity of the new economic sociology was due more to this set of demarcations than to a
specific intellectual approach. The new economic sociology obtained its scientific legitimacy by bringing together two promising new currents: network analysis and neo-institutionalism, along with a more marginal cultural
mode of analysis. While there had been very little exchange among these currents, mutual references became more ecumenical
once a common label had emerged and distinct intellectual programs were launched. Institutional legitimacy was quickly obtained thanks to the support of the Russell Sage Foundation, enabling a process of expansion that in Europe
developed far more slowly. The case of the “new economic sociology” demonstrates that the creation of new subdisciplines cannot
be understood merely through the analysis of direct interactions among persons linked to each other by inter-acquaintanceship.
In accordance with a field theoretical approach, academic entrepreneurs function under structural conditions which must also
be taken into account. Among these structural conditions were changes in the academic field itself (due to demographical effects,
the imperialism of economics, and the surge in Business Schools) as well as in the political sphere (the rise of neo-liberalism).
Bernard Convert is a sociologist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France) and at Lille University (CLERSE Laboratory). His current research interests are the sociology of education, economic sociology and the sociology of the Internet. Recent publications are a collective work, Repenser le marché (2003) and Les groupes professionnels et l’internet (with L. Demailly) (2006 in press). Johan Heilbron is a sociologist at the Centre de sociologie européenne (CSE) in Paris and at Erasmus University in Rotterdam. Among his research interests are the historical sociology of the social sciences, economic sociology, the sociology of culture and transnational exchange. Recent book publications are The Rise of Social Theory (1995), The Rise of the Social Sciences and the Formation of Modernity (with L. Magnusson and B. Wittrock, 1998, paperback 2001), Pour une histoire des sciences sociales. Hommage à Pierre Bourdieu (with R. Lenoir and G. Sapiro, 2004). 相似文献
Bernard Convert (Corresponding author)Email: |
Johan HeilbronEmail: |
Bernard Convert is a sociologist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France) and at Lille University (CLERSE Laboratory). His current research interests are the sociology of education, economic sociology and the sociology of the Internet. Recent publications are a collective work, Repenser le marché (2003) and Les groupes professionnels et l’internet (with L. Demailly) (2006 in press). Johan Heilbron is a sociologist at the Centre de sociologie européenne (CSE) in Paris and at Erasmus University in Rotterdam. Among his research interests are the historical sociology of the social sciences, economic sociology, the sociology of culture and transnational exchange. Recent book publications are The Rise of Social Theory (1995), The Rise of the Social Sciences and the Formation of Modernity (with L. Magnusson and B. Wittrock, 1998, paperback 2001), Pour une histoire des sciences sociales. Hommage à Pierre Bourdieu (with R. Lenoir and G. Sapiro, 2004). 相似文献
16.
We study the general class of two-player public-policy contests and specify the asymmetry condition under which a more restrained government intervention that reduces the contestants’ prizes has the “perverse” effect of increasing their aggregate lobbying efforts.
相似文献
Shmuel NitzanEmail: |
17.
18.
A new version of the age-old controversy between religion and science has been launched by today’s intelligent design movement.
Although ostensibly concerned simply with combating Darwinism, this new creationism seeks to drive a “wedge” into the materialist
view of the world, originating with the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus and manifested in modern times by Darwin, Marx,
and Freud. Intelligent design proponents thus can be seen as challenging not only natural and physical science but social
science as well. In this article, we attempt to explain the long history of this controversy, stretching over millennia, and
to defend science (especially social science) against the criticisms of intelligent design proponents – by defending science’s
materialist roots.
Brett Clark received his Ph.D. from the University of Oregon and is the Editorial Director of Monthly Review Press. His research interests are ecology, political economy, and science. He has published articles and review essays in Theory and Society, The Sociological Quarterly, Organization & Environment, and Critical Sociology. He received the 2007 Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association for a series of articles (one of which was the article “Carbon Metabolism: Global Capitalism, Climate Change, and the Biospheric Rift,” published in Theory and Society in 2005) with Richard York. John Bellamy Foster is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of Monthly Review (New York). He is the author of The Theory of Monopoly Capitalism (1986); The Vulnerable Planet (1994); “Marx’s Theory of Metabolic Rift,” American Journal of Sociology (1999); Marx’s Ecology (2000); Ecology Against Capitalism (2002); Naked Imperialism (2006); and (with Paul Burkett) “Metabolism, Energy, and Entropy in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy,” Theory and Society (2006). Richard York is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and co-editor of the Sage journal Organization & Environment. His research focuses on human interaction with the natural environment and the philosophy, history, and sociology of science. He has published articles in American Sociological Review, Gender & Society, Rural Sociology, Social Problems, Social Science Research, Sociological Forum, The Sociological Quarterly, Theory and Society, and other scholarly journals. He has twice (2004 and 2007) received the Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association. 相似文献
Brett Clark (Corresponding author)Email: |
John Bellamy FosterEmail: |
Richard YorkEmail: |
Brett Clark received his Ph.D. from the University of Oregon and is the Editorial Director of Monthly Review Press. His research interests are ecology, political economy, and science. He has published articles and review essays in Theory and Society, The Sociological Quarterly, Organization & Environment, and Critical Sociology. He received the 2007 Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association for a series of articles (one of which was the article “Carbon Metabolism: Global Capitalism, Climate Change, and the Biospheric Rift,” published in Theory and Society in 2005) with Richard York. John Bellamy Foster is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and editor of Monthly Review (New York). He is the author of The Theory of Monopoly Capitalism (1986); The Vulnerable Planet (1994); “Marx’s Theory of Metabolic Rift,” American Journal of Sociology (1999); Marx’s Ecology (2000); Ecology Against Capitalism (2002); Naked Imperialism (2006); and (with Paul Burkett) “Metabolism, Energy, and Entropy in Marx’s Critique of Political Economy,” Theory and Society (2006). Richard York is Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oregon and co-editor of the Sage journal Organization & Environment. His research focuses on human interaction with the natural environment and the philosophy, history, and sociology of science. He has published articles in American Sociological Review, Gender & Society, Rural Sociology, Social Problems, Social Science Research, Sociological Forum, The Sociological Quarterly, Theory and Society, and other scholarly journals. He has twice (2004 and 2007) received the Outstanding Publication Award from the Environment and Technology Section of the American Sociological Association. 相似文献
19.
In the late twentieth century, many social scientists and other social commentators came to characterize the world as evolving
into an “information society.” Central to these claims was the notion that new social uses of information, and particularly
application of scientific knowledge, are transforming social life in fundamental ways. Among the supposed transformations
are the rise of intellectuals in social importance, growing productivity and prosperity stemming from increasingly knowledge-based
economic activity, and replacement of political conflict by authoritative, knowledge-based decision-making. We trace these
ideas to their origins in the Enlightenment doctrines of Saint Simon and Comte, show that empirical support for them has never
been strong, and consider the durability of their social appeal.
James B. Rule is Distinguished Affiliated Scholar at the Center for the Study of Law and Society, University of California, Berkeley. He has researched and published widely on matters relating to sociological theory and the role of information in social life. His most recent books are Theory and Progress in Social Science (Cambridge University Press, 1997), Computing in Organizations; Myth and Experience (co-authored with Debra Gimlin and Sylvia Sievers, Transaction, 2002) and Privacy in Peril (Oxford University Press, 2007). Yasemin Besen focuses on young people in the United States in her work, which combines qualitative and quantitative methods. Her research interests include teenage labor, gender, and inequality. Her work has been published in Contexts, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, NWSAJ, and Equal Opportunities International. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. She is currently Assistant Professor of Sociology at Montclair State University. 相似文献
James B. Rule (Corresponding author)Email: |
Yasemin BesenEmail: |
James B. Rule is Distinguished Affiliated Scholar at the Center for the Study of Law and Society, University of California, Berkeley. He has researched and published widely on matters relating to sociological theory and the role of information in social life. His most recent books are Theory and Progress in Social Science (Cambridge University Press, 1997), Computing in Organizations; Myth and Experience (co-authored with Debra Gimlin and Sylvia Sievers, Transaction, 2002) and Privacy in Peril (Oxford University Press, 2007). Yasemin Besen focuses on young people in the United States in her work, which combines qualitative and quantitative methods. Her research interests include teenage labor, gender, and inequality. Her work has been published in Contexts, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, NWSAJ, and Equal Opportunities International. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. She is currently Assistant Professor of Sociology at Montclair State University. 相似文献
20.
Jonathan Kirshner 《Theory and Society》2009,38(5):527-541
As President Nixon once observed, “we are all Keynesians.” And we do indeed live in a macroeconomic world, essentially, as
defined and elucidated by Keynes. But Keynes himself is underrepresented in both political science and in mainstream economics.
This is a costly intellectual error. Keynes’ prodigious writings, as well as his actions, offer a treasure trove of inspiration,
analysis, and insight. This article considers four themes in Keynes’ oeuvre that are especially worthy of revisiting: the
importance of economic inequality, the potentially fragile underpinnings of international economic order, the inherent dysfunctions
of the international monetary economy, and, perhaps most important, Keynes’ philosophy and its relationship to economic inquiry.
Jonathan Kirshner is Professor of Government and Director of the Peace Studies Program at Cornell University. He is the author of Currency and Coercion, the Political Economy of International Monetary Power (Princeton University Press, 1995) and Appeasing Bankers: Financial Caution on the Road to War (Princeton University Press, 2007), and the Editor of Monetary Orders: Ambiguous Economics, Ubiquitous Politics (Cornell University Press, 2003), and Globalization and National Security (Routledge, 2006). Professor Kirshner’s research focuses on the politics of money and finance, as well as economics and national security. He is the co-editor of the multi-disciplinary book series, “Cornell Studies in Money,” and is currently working on projects relating to the future of the dollar as an international currency. 相似文献
Jonathan KirshnerEmail: |
Jonathan Kirshner is Professor of Government and Director of the Peace Studies Program at Cornell University. He is the author of Currency and Coercion, the Political Economy of International Monetary Power (Princeton University Press, 1995) and Appeasing Bankers: Financial Caution on the Road to War (Princeton University Press, 2007), and the Editor of Monetary Orders: Ambiguous Economics, Ubiquitous Politics (Cornell University Press, 2003), and Globalization and National Security (Routledge, 2006). Professor Kirshner’s research focuses on the politics of money and finance, as well as economics and national security. He is the co-editor of the multi-disciplinary book series, “Cornell Studies in Money,” and is currently working on projects relating to the future of the dollar as an international currency. 相似文献