Open the social sciences

To whom and for what

Bibliographic Data

ID7102835
AuthorsM Burawoy (0000-0002-7195-7278, University of California., corresponding author)
Year2008
Volume6
Issue3
Pages137-146
Publication date2008-04-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePortugese Journal of Social Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1476-413X • E-ISSN: 1758-9509
PublisherISCTE – Lisbon University Institute (PUBLISHER • PT)
DOI10.1386/pjss.6.3.137_1
OpenAlexW2034649516
LanguageEN
Citations received18
References cited1

The Gulbenkian Commission Report (1996) on the restructuring of the social sciences disavowed anachronistic disciplinary divisions, Western universalism and methodological positivism, and instead proposed the unification of all scientific knowledge under what it called pluralistic universalism. It exposed its own scholasticism, however, in failing to address for whom and for what is scientific knowledge produced. With these two questions as points of departure, this article develops a disciplinary division of labour, and thereby distinguishes among professional, policy, public and critical knowledge. Examining the form and relations among these four types of knowledge allows one to recognise the real basis of divergences among disciplines, and within disciplines across nations and history. A global perspective on the social sciences today examines the specific responses to market fundamentalism from different disciplines and different places in the world system

Discipline · Epistemology · Fundamentalism · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Positivism · Reductionism · Social science · Sociology · Unification · Universalism · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub