Writing Sociology at the Beginning of the Twenty-first Century
Paul Veyne has suggested in 1971 that Sociology lacked a study object. Three quarters of a century after Durkheim’s Rules, it had yet to discover social types and orders of preponderant facts. At any rate, Veyne claimed, since Sociology or at least sociologists exist, we must conclude that, under that label, they do something else. Briefly, besides studying the logical conditions of Sociology, we should also sociologically consider it, as well as other neighbour and potentially rival disciplines. In this paper it is argued that, contrary to other scientific fields, Sociology lives in an environment of permanently renewed crisis. Different authors and traditions have indeed asserted exactly that, while based on entirely diverse assumptions. In order to justify the characteristic traits of today’s crisis, we try to list some of the little demons that have contributed to the current situation: 1) The hagiographic syndrome; 2) The isomorphism defence; 3) The acceptance urge.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: R. Miguel Lupi, 20, 1249-078 LISBOA|
Fax: +351-213 925 850
Web page: http://pascal.iseg.utl.pt/~socius/home.html
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:soc:wpaper:wp032012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mónica Fraga)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.