The imperial entanglements of sociology and the problem of scientific autonomy in Germany, France, and the United States.

Autor/in	Steinmetz, George
Titel	The imperial entanglements of sociology and the problem of scientific autonomy in Germany, France, and the United States. Gefälligkeitsübersetzung: Die imperiale Verfilzung der Soziologie und das Problem der wissenschaftlichen Autonomie in Deutschland, Frankreich und den USA.
Quelle	Aus: Soeffner, Hans-Georg (Hrsg.): Transnationale Vergesellschaftungen. Verhandlungen des 35. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Frankfurt am Main 2010. 2. Wiesbaden: Springer VS (2013) S. 857-871 PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Abbildungen 3
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; gedruckt; Sammelwerksbeitrag
ISBN	978-3-531-18169-1
DOI	10.1007/978-3-531-18971-0_76
Schlagwörter	Vergleichende Forschung; Autonomie; Zeitschrift; Imperialismus; Kolonialismus; Geopolitik; Internationalisierung; Militär; Soziologie; Hochschule; Fachliteratur; Heterogenität; Historische Analyse; Konferenzschrift; Krise; Vernetzung; Deutschland; Frankreich; Nordamerika; USA
Abstract	"Anthropologists have long discussed the ways in which their discipline has been entangled with the colonized populations they study, but this has been less true of sociology. Nonetheless, sociologists have contributed to colonial and imperial research, theory, and policy since the discipline's intellectual beginnings. The recent period has seen a boom in colonial and postcolonial sociology as well as efforts to involve sociologists in ongoing imperial missions, such as the ones in lraq and Afghanistan. This lecture focuses on sociologists in Germany, France and the United States, the three countries where sociology first emerged as an academic discipline, and Great Britain, which had the largest global empire at the moment when disciplinary sociology arose. The paper shows that sociologists have been active in 'imperial research' throughout the discipline's history, even if interest in the different forms of empire has varied over time and cross-nationally. The paper also establishes that sociologists have related to empires as analysts, critics, and advisors, and the article examines each of these roles. Several questions guide the analysis: What accounts for cross-national variations and the historical waxing and waning of interest in empire among sociologists? Why was the topic of empire monopolized by anthropology in 20th-century Britain but shared with sociology in France? Why has a historical sociology of colonialism emerged recently in the 'non-colonial' United States? How are patterns of social-scientific attentiveness related to dynamics inside social-scientific fields as opposed to ongoing imperial dynamics in the real world? Finally, why have some social scientists been able to retain some degree of autonomy from their imperial objects of investigation while others have become heteronomous imperial scientists?" (author's abstract).
Erfasst von	GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Mannheim
Update	2013/2