Sociology’s global challenge (original) (raw)
Related papers
I ssues related to globalization are central to most contemporary works in sociology, no matter the specialization. During the past two decades, sociologists have investigated the effects of globalization on most aspects of social life and the extent and variety of the research and literature on the subject have been widely commented upon. This special issue of the Canadian Journal of Sociology represents a modest attempt to stimulate a discussion of the relation sociology itself has with globalization. These papers examine the contemporary transformations of the organization of sociological work and the production of sociological research and discourse in the context of the growing interaction of local, national, regional, and global networks.
World Society: An Ice-Breaker for a Global Shift in Sociology?
Social Responsibility, 2018
Conceptualizations of world society represent elementary breaks with traditional thinking styles in sociology. In this research field, nation-state myths have been disenchanted, the local is identified as global and vice versa, and the central concept of sociology-that of society, which has always been manifold and controversial within the disciplinebecomes relevant again. World society approaches require the self-reflexive perspective of the constitutive conditions of the discipline of science. They also make essential contributions to the de-nationalization of concepts and to methods of empirical research. Thus conceptuality refers to the stepping out of a national context and the opening out to the global level as a reference framework for analysis. In addition, conceptualizations of world society are an important contribution to the global social responsibility of science. Sociology has, thanks to world society approaches, constructive plans to put forward a global shift of the discipline of science. For sociologists, this project will be a central challenge of the twenty-first century at the construction site of sociology.
Societal Structures and Practices in the Milieu of Globalization.
The world, as a product of the Peace of Westphalia, consisting of sovereign states, has undoubtedly changed since 1648. The very essence of sovereignty, ingrained strength of which has so far been considered the determinant pattern of the state-system, has, somewhat, lost its meaning, having turned a whole world into a borderless place. This ongoing transformation of the world is but the process of globalization, whereby individuals are not merely residents of their native countries but the interconnected citizens of a single world. “Gone are accustomed differences in national or regional preference.”1 Natural tendency toward homogenization of the states and their populations through standardization of the approaches to social, economic and political activities is, however, stipulated by the eternal quest for scarce resources that are only to be achieved under the rules set by the international system, to which all the participants are members by consent. Not that all the players of the “world theatre” are equal in terms of the roles assumed, but each actor acts according to scenario prescribed to him within the functional frames of the world system, described neatly by I. Wallerstein.2 “The current processes of globalization, at many levels, have observably diminished, if not complete cancelled, the capacity of the nation state to control the processes of economic, cultural, political and social dimensions.”3 Therefore, logical but contradictive conclusion comes at place suggesting that self-sustainable world system based on and empowered by international relations and international cooperation is to thrive by the increase of relations and cooperation, however, to undermine the very nature of the nation state-the key actor in the system, by diminishing its sovereignty and the importance of territorial integrity. Speculations over the future of the world order is not a simple task, all the more so in the context of rapid economic, political, social and, in some extent, even ideological changes. Thus, the objective of this work is not only to establish that countries are to become similar in their societal structures and practices, but to critically evaluate causes and consequences of this processes. Of no less importance is the attempt of this work to elaborate the assumption that the current process of globalization responsible for homogenization of the world and decline of contemporary world system is an inevitable denouement of artificially created Westphalian sovereign-state system.
Sociological masters of the world. For and against «global sociology»
2020
Calls for “global sociology” are nowadays commonplace. Sometimes they are framed in a positive way, but more often are presented in a negative register, suggesting that sociology’s evident institutional inequalities and related analytical failings are so great that the discipline risks losing any claims to relevance as the world changes around it. Such demands suggest the need for partial or total “intellectual overhaul” of sociology, to render it fit for purpose today, epistemically, institutionally, and ethically. Sociology is seen to be overwhelmingly located in metropolitan locations in the Developed World and Global North. This institutional imbalance is widely understood to reproduce chronically Euro-American-centred analytical orientations. There is much to be gained today by taking a position on “global sociology”, forwarding one’s own preferred position while simultaneously criticising the positions of others. Sociological careers can be forged and intellectual kudos and re...
Chapter 1 World Society : An IceBreaker for a Global Shift in Sociology ?
2018
Conceptualizations of world society represent elementary breaks with traditional thinking styles in sociology. In this research field, nation-state myths have been disenchanted, the local is identified as global and vice versa, and the central concept of sociology—that of society, which has always been manifold and controversial within the discipline— becomes relevant again. World society approaches require the self-reflexive perspective of the constitutive conditions of the discipline of science. They also make essential contributions to the de-nationalization of concepts and to methods of empirical research. Thus conceptuality refers to the stepping out of a national context and the opening out to the global level as a reference framework for analysis. In addition, conceptualizations of world society are an important contribution to the global social responsibility of science. Sociology has, thanks to world society approaches, constructive plans to put forward a global shift of th...
sociology of the international
To develop a sociology of the international, it is common in international relations (IR) to use a notion of inter-subjectivity defined as the space ''in-between'' individual actors. This approach is based on a parts ⁄ whole systems theory where common norms and values inscribed in international law not only create a ''world society'' but also provide for its social cohesion. Rooted in a parts ⁄ whole distinction, the very term of inter-subjectivity takes on a rather positivist meaning as the social quality of the international is then ''measurable'' and possibly even falsifiable by observing states' behavior. In the end, the inter-subjective quality of rules and norms is then ultimately reduced to the individual level. This article proposes a different avenue that breaks with the parts ⁄ whole distinction to emphasize the connectivity of communications. From this perspective, the notion of inter-subjectivity appears to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution and is thus replaced by the distinction between system and environment. The changing contours of international law are then decoupled from states' interests to emphasize the ''relative autonomy'' of the legal discourse as represented in its shifting paradox and programs.
Global sociology and its discontents
Diogene, 2024
Sociology emerged in the course of Western modernization; its major classical-era statements are preoccupied with modernity and its impact on national societies. After decolonization, 'Third World' modernization paved the way for the notion of globalization. The sociology of globalization is a current specialty within US and European sociological associations. The promise of global sociology has been on the agenda of the International Sociological Association since at least 1990. At a deeper level, global sociology requires un-thinking the role of core concepts such as modernity or religion or society vis-à-vis their Western origins. Global Studies and post-colonial sociology, two of the most widely known research fields claiming global intent, are examined with respect to whether they provide adequate conceptual resources for global sociology. While the research agendas of both offer promising insights, inquiry suggests that both suffer from important drawbacks. The sociological tradition is now facing an impasse; fragmentation may persist, but other possibilities also exist. No grand solution is perhaps possible. A truly global sociology may eventually emerge from the original interpretations that develop from non-Western historical paths.
On the Communicative Geography of Global Sociology
Canadian Journal of …, 2008
This article analyzes the two distinct communicative logics that inform the institutional geography and normative understanding of global sociology. The globalizing logic imagines a unitary global space that organizes sociological debate; the transnational logic envisions a series of overlapping sociological debates, often organized within a national context that is in the process of cosmopolitan, global, and transnational transformation. We argue that both logics shape communication in the sociological tradition, even if neither project is fully realized. The main challenge to global sociology, particularly in its globalizing form, is the existence of extremely influential spaces of sociological debate in North America and Europe, which reproduce the privileges of the larger and more powerful national associations. At the same time, these large, powerful national associations are becoming increasingly transnationalized, putting centre and periphery into dialogue, if in limited and uneven ways.