Conceptualizing Transnational Engagements: A Structure and Agency Perspective on (Hometown) Transnationalism

This paper unfolds a conceptual framework of migrants' transnational engagements. It combines three elements: a concept of social agent apprehended in its plurality of roles and social embedding; the Habermas theory of communicative action accounting for the communicative dimension of transnational engagements; a concept of social institution explaining the role of migrant organizations in framing transnational activities. This framework is applied to the analysis of cross border engagements of Moroccan, Algerian and Indian hometown organizations in the development of their respective sending areas.     

The Psychology of Working in Practice: A Theory of Change for a New Era

This article advances the psychology of working theory by developing a parallel change‐based paradigm to guide interventions at the level of individuals (i.e., the psychology of working counseling) and systems (i.e., the psychology of working systemic intervention). The change paradigm presented in this article includes (a) a needs assessment encompassing survival, social connection/contribution, and self‐determination and (b) input on the mobilization of agentic action that includes critical reflection and action, proactive engagement, social support, and community engagement. The needs assessment and agentic action aspects of this approach can be used to foster change in individual counseling, advocacy, and systemic intervention. Case examples reflecting a systemic intervention and an individual counseling vignette are presented along with implications for research, such as explorations of the impact of these change models on client outcomes and systemic change efforts.     

Re-thinking a systemic approach to child welfare: A critical response to the framework for the assessment of children in need and their families

The Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need was introduced by the Department of Health (England and Wales) in 2000. Offering guidance to social workers in child and family settings, it came as a watershed in three main ways. First, it emphasized the connection between child poverty and developmental delay. Second, it advocated a systemic approach to child welfare by drawing on a number of related theories, including Bronfenbrenner's (1979) model of human development. Third, it overturned a restricted preoccupation with child abuse that had dominated much of child and family social work in the past. These developments aside, the systemic basis of the framework is problematic because it fails to explain how power operates within society. Without this understanding, social workers will not be in a position to tackle the inequalities which the framework rightly targets. This paper seeks to remedy these deficits by drawing on the critical systems theory of Jürgen Habermas.     

Discourse or Dialogue? Habermas, the Bakhtin Circle, and the question of concrete utterances

This article argues that the Bakhtin Circle presents a more realistic theory of concrete dialogue than the theory of discourse elaborated by Habermas. The Bakhtin Circle places speech within the ??concrete whole utterance?? and by this phrase they mean that the study of everyday language should be analyzed through the mediations of historical social systems such as capitalism. These mediations are also characterized by a determinate set of contradictions??the capital-labor contradiction in capitalism, for example??that are reproduced in unique ways in more concrete forms of life (the state, education, religion, culture, and so on). Utterances always dialectically refract these processes and as such are internal concrete moments, or concrete social forms, of them. Moreover, new and unrepeatable dialogic events arise in these concrete social forms in order to overcome and understand the constant dialectical flux of social life. But this theory of dialogue is different from that expounded by Habermas, who tends to explore speech acts by reproducing a dualism between repeatable and universal ??abstract?? discursive processes (commonly known as the ideal speech situation) and empirical uses of discourse. These critical points against Habermas are developed by focusing on six main areas: sentences and utterances; the lifeworld and background language; active versus passive understandings of language; validity claims; obligation and relevance in language; and dialectical universalism.     

交往行动理论视角下社区服务居民参与的改善——基于天津市河北区建昌道社区服务中心的调研

基于天津市建昌道社区服务中心的实地调研,通过案例分析发现其存在的种种问题,并结合哈贝马斯的交往行动理论,提出相关政策建议。     

The theorization of social co-ordinations in differentiated societies: the theory of generalized symbolic media in Parsons,Luhmann and Habermas

The problem of the differentiation of societies is at the core of the sociological imagination about the rise of modernity. In postwar sociology, T. Parsons developed the theory of generalized symbolic media in the mid-1960s to tackle, theoretically and historically, the issue of differentiation. According to him, the interchange media are defined as resources oriented to exchange processes between the subsystems of the social system. Starting with money, Parsons argues that the remaining media (power, influence, and value-commitments) have a set of characteristics defined as common properties for all media. After this first formulation, contemporary theorists such as Niklas Luhmann and Jürgen Habermas have developed and modified the Parsonian theory: Luhmann rejects the idea of interchange and proposes the use of communication; Habermas distinguishes between steering and communication media. In all three cases, the focus of the theory is on the characterization of the strongest dynamics of social co-ordination present in differentiated societies. A major result of these developments is the inclusion of new dimensions on which to conceive the properties of media, not only those of money but also language. Beyond differences, then, it is proposed that there is only one theory of generalized symbolic media which can be understood as a progressive research programme, in Lakatos' terms. Finally, the hand-in-hand evolution between the theory of media and Habermas' and Luhmann's re-conceptualizations on societal differentiation in contemporary societies will also be revealed.     

Critical Theory and the Hermeneutical Circle*

This paper examines the debate between Gadamer and Habermas concerning the relationship between hermeneutics and critical theory. Formulating the hermeneutical circle in terms of relationship between understanding and interpretation, this paper examines three positions on the circle held by positivism, critical theory and hermeneutics, respectively. A commitment to method and procedure on the part of Habermas is offered as the basis for critical theory's limited acceptance of the hermeneutical circle. This is shown through an analysis of Knowledge and Human Interests as indicative of Habermas's implicit objectivism and his methodical, as opposed to hermeneutical, model of reasoning for social inquiry. The best definition for hermeneutics is: to let what is alienated by the character of the written word or by the character of being distantiated by cultural or historical distances speak again. This is hermeneutics: to let what seems to be far and alienated speak again (Gadamer, 1980a:83).     

Wertrationalität und das Modell der Frame-Selektion

According to Max Weber, value-rational action is characterized by a self-conscious elaboration of ultimate values and a consistently planned orientation to those values without regard for other consequences. This article reconstructs this type of social action within the Model of Frame Selection. This model proves to be able to incorporate Weber’s ideas of a “value reflexion” and “value orientation” as special cases of a more general theory of action. Thereby, links are also established to works of other theorists such as Raymond Boudon or Jürgen Habermas. On this basis, it is further argued that the Model of Frame Selection is well suited to provide Weber’s macro-sociological concepts of “value spheres” and “life orders” with an action-theoretic foundation. The article concludes with general remarks regarding the relationship between the Weberian research program and the approach of analytical sociology.     

Defining social work is a never-ending story

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we present some of the reasons why defining social work is a difficult task. A brief history of the definition of social work is presented. We introduce a division of definitions of social work into the enumerative and abstract. The first fail to cover the entire palette of social work practices, while the second are paradoxically both too narrow and too inclusive. In order to tackle the problem of the over-inclusiveness of the definitions, we delimit the area of operation of social work using the duality of Habermas’ lifeworld and system. We maintain that Habermas’ theory should be used as a guideline for re-thinking what ‘goes wrong’ when social work is to be defined. Namely, social work practice mainly takes place in the borderlands between lifeworld and system, where both fail. This fact influences the definitions of social work, its theory, and its practice. The definition of social work is dependent not only on local knowledge and determinants, but on social problems that are local but also globally determined as well. As social problems change and evolve, the definition of social work remains a never-ending story.     

Ideology and Social Movements: The Contributions of Habermas*

Theorists of social movements have not developed a sufficiently complex perspective of the role that ideology has in the dynamics of social movements. This essay demonstrates that Habermas’theory of the autonomy of normative structures is useful to explain the independent role of ideology in determining the direction taken by social movements. Habermas’emphasis on the interrelationship between cultural traditions, consensus formation, epistemologies, and differentiated rationalization processes furnishes an alternative to the instrumentalist and ahistorical assumptions that often characterize theorists’treatment of ideology in social movements. Empirical examples from studies of social movements are utilized to demonstrate the usefulness of Habermas’approach.     

New Rage,New Perspectives?

The Eurozone crisis has led to a long and remarkable protest wave. Civil society raised its voice against the ever-harsher austerity measures implemented to deal with the crisis. The article focuses on the role of civil society and its potential to contribute new perspectives to the debate. Such a contribution would depend on two preconditions: 1. Civil society actors need to mobilize successfully to make their voices heard. 2. Civil society actors contribute a perspective that differs to the perspectives of actors from institutionalized politics. Both preconditions are analyzed empirically for two countries that are in very different situations in the crisis scenario: Greece and Germany. Greece has been hit most severely by the crisis; Germany is the most prominent country defining the crisis management, and it provides the largest share of credit guarantees for “crisis countries.” Social movement theory is used to explain the differing evolution of protests in the two countries. In the early phase of the crisis, the established landscape of political parties in both countries offered few opportunities for their citizens to vote in opposition to the crisis management, which is conducive to extra-parliamentary protest. Differences in deprivation, discursive opportunities and the resource basis of mobilization structures can explain differences in protest frequency but also to some extent the evolution of protest over time. Taking up Habermas’ argument regarding the specific perspective of civil society actors in the public debate, we then analyze to which extent the arguments of civil society actors deviate from those of more institutionalized actors. A discursive actor attribution analysis unveils that civil society actors are more sensitive to social problems and grand systemic questions. Moreover, civil society actors are less hesitant to blame actors on the EU level and other EU Member States, even though their overall contribution to the crisis debate is rather marginal.     

Die europäische Schuldenkrise als Schub systemischer Vergesellschaftung: Von Partizipationsversprechen zu Partizipationszwang

The article presents a sociological conceptualization of the dealing with the recent sovereign debt crisis in the European Monetary Union (EMU), which is reconstructed as a push of “sociation” (vergesellschaftung in Simmel’s sense) that maneuvered populations of indebted states into de facto contractual obligations vis-à-vis their states’ creditors. Seen from this perspective, the sovereign debt crisis has led to an, if highly ambivalent, deepening of European “integration”. The article suggests a combination of Habermas’s distinction between system and life-world, which enables an interpretation of contract-like relationships as systemic mode of integration potentially harking back on the life-world, with David Graeber’s emphasis on the asymmetrical and hierarchical processes of sociation inherent in contractualized and marketized creditor-debtor relationships. Far from postulating an evolutionary development of processes of debt-related sociation that might be associated with the modernization-theoretical proclivities in Habermas’s theory, the article analyzes the role of financial market publics in creating a structure of legitimation that supported the political interpretation of the financial crisis as a sovereign debt crisis in the EMU, thus bestowing justification on the treatment of populations as “debtors of last resort”.     

Beyond dialogue and antagonism: a Bakhtinian perspective on the controversy in political theory

The aim of the article is to show that the contradiction between dialogue and antagonism can be overcome with the help of the idea of dialogue as developed by the Russian thinker Mikhail Bakhtin. The lack of such theory led to the rejection of liberalism or to the introduction of dialogical principle into the body of liberal politics. It was Jürgen Habermas who first understood the necessity of dialogical consensus as the basis of liberal democracy. On the other hand, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe developed the concept of agonistic democracy, claiming that conflict is inevitable in liberal democracy because consensual relations cannot harmonize contradictory political identities. The second part of the article is the elaboration of Bakhtin’s theory of dialogue and its relevance for political theory. The main point is that dialogue leads to better understanding but not necessarily to consensus. If this is so, then both conceptions of the political are moments in never-ending dialogical relations. The significance of Bakhtin’s idea of dialogue for political theory consists thus in the recognition of the inevitable dialogical nature of society. However, this dialogical concept also has a normative character. Society has to find a balance between two extremes: excessive dialogue, which leads to anarchy, and the lack of dialogue, which leads to totalitarianism.     

The Problem of Triple Contingency in Habermas

From a certain perspective, Habermas's theory of communicative action is a response, in extension of Mead, Schutz, and Parsons, to the risk of dissension posed by double contingency. Starting from double contingency, both The Theory of Communicative Action and Between Facts and Norms are essentially an elaboration of a solution to this problem in terms of a more fully developed theory of communication than had been available to his predecessors. Given the intense concentration and the immense expenditure of energy on the working out of the coordinating accomplishments and structures required by the complex solution envisaged by him, it is unsurprising that Habermas overlooks the next most important problem intermittently raised by the theory of communicative action, namely, the problem of "triple contingency," that is, the contingency that the public brings into the social process. This has far-reaching implications for Habermas's place in the sociological tradition and for the relation of the younger generation to him. Because of his continued search for a solution to a problem posed in the classical phase of sociology and his concomitant failure to develop the new problem that he himself raised in the course of so doing, he can be classified with Parsons as being a neoclassical sociologist. He nevertheless bequeaths a serious problem to contemporary sociology.     

Sensational signs,authority and the public sphere: Settler colonial rhetoric in times of change

The article explores the emotional regimes of settler colonialism in post‐apartheid South Africa. The focus is on apocalyptic fears of the imagined eradication of whiteness. These fears are articulated in response to postcolonial/decolonial interpellations of abject whiteness, and are made visible in a range of sensational signs that circulate online and offline. The signs cluster around two themes that are central to the ideologies of settler colonialism: land (and its feared loss), and (white) bodies (and their feared disappearance). Following Sarah Ahmed (2004a,b), emotionally charged signs can be seen as actions (akin to words in speech act theory). In contrast to Jürgen Habermas’ conception of the public sphere as an idealized place of rational debate, the article argues that a combination of affect‐emotion‐feeling and the performance of ‘reason’—what Aristotelian rhetoric refers to as pathos and ethos—are integral for understanding public‐political discourses of whiteness at a time when white privilege has been called out globally (and locally), and white dominance has lost its stronghold.     

Blockchains,trust and action nets: extending the pathologies of financial globalization

Blockchains combine digital encryption and time stamping technologies to enable digital exchange to occur in manners celebrated by proponents as ‘trust‐free’. Yet, an increasing range of scholars argue that actual applications of the peer‐to‐peer technology shifts, rather than eliminates, trust. In this article, we draw on organizational theory to argue that efforts to remove trust reorganize the action nets that underpin payment systems in manners that extend rather than eliminate longstanding pathologies afflicting financial globalization. Our analysis supports and extends the critiques that blockchain applications are far from ‘trust‐free’. By tracing how efforts to reconfigure the socio‐technical composition of the humans and objects that underpin payment systems, we illustrate how blockchain applications shift the location and character of the technical vulnerabilities that create market instabilities and concentration, as well as elite‐led governance.     

Sociology,the public sphere,and modern government: a challenge to the dominance of Habermas

There is an unfortunate tendency within some branches of sociology – particularly those usually called ‘critical’, that is, those associated with ‘critical social theory’– to treat with disdain the understanding of the public sphere that many modern governments use daily in making and implementing public policy. The majority of sociologists in those branches seem to prefer, as part and parcel of their normative commitments, Jürgen Habermas's Kantian understanding of the public sphere, which focuses primarily on reason and morality and insists that these two forces are of a higher order than politics and law. This paper offers a set of criticisms of the Habermas–Kant understanding, arguing that its focus on reason and morality, were it to become more widespread, would steer sociology into public policy irrelevance. The paper goes on to describe a very different understanding of the public sphere, a politico‐legal or civil‐peace understanding which operates as the public policy focus of those governments that have relegated questions of salvation (whether religious or ideological) to the private sphere. This understanding emerged from early modern attempts to carve out a domain of relative freedom and security against the deadly violence of religious disputation sweeping across Europe. The paper readily acknowledges that some ‘non‐critical’ branches of sociology already employ a version of this understanding.     

NEW SOCIAL MOVEMENTS,POPULISM AND THE POLITICS OF THE LIFEWORLD

Since the 1960s, New Social Movements (NSMs) have been prominent as new actors on the political scene. But, by comparison with other radical political agents, they have made a relatively poor showing in mainstream political theory. Habermas, for example, criticizes NSMs, including second-wave feminism, for merely masquerading as new forms of radical political agency. By introducing some ideas from Laclau, I show how to counter Habermas's criticism. I then rethink NSMs as a new post-liberal form of democratic-emancipatory political agency, which by contrast with the politics of the public sphere that Habermas champions, is anchored in the less organized reaches of the lifeworld.     

The Significance of Shils

Edward Shils was a widely recognized but misunderstood thinker. The original contexts of his thought are not well understood and greatly distorted by associating him with the concerns of Parsons. Shils provides a fully comparable alternative to the thought of Habermas and Foucault, with essentially similar roots: practice theory, the dissolution of Marxism in the twenties, and Carl Schmitt. Though Shils was indebted to the American sociological tradition, with respect to these issues his sources were outside it: in Hendrik de Man, T. S. Eliot, and Michael Polanyi. It is shown how Shils responded to Schmitt's argument about the inherent conflict between democracy and liberalism in terms of an account of civility and tradition, and how this argument results in a critique of Foucault, Habermas, and collectivistic liberalism.     

Habermas,Critical Theory,and the Relativistic Predicament

Habermas' critical theory stands or falls on the unity of procedural reason. When Stephen Toulmin raised the problem of reason being differentiated by functions and purposes within each field of argumentation, whether law, medicine, science, or politics, Habermas' response was both weak and vague. This paper proposes how Habermas may concede Toulmin's point, and yet demonstrate that it does not ultimately challenge the unity of procedural reason that grounds his critical theory.