scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "John Law published in 1974"



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a discussion of interpretive sociology and ethnomethodology is presented, which stresses the interaction of methods and theories, and argues that our methodology, when combined with our theoretical orientations, has led to a particular and identifiable distortion in the type of theory we produce.
Abstract: sense test those models and categories. I shall outline a theme, current in the literature of interpretive sociology and ethnomethodology, which stresses the interaction of methods and theories, and in applying the same approach to the sociology of science, I shall argue that our methodology, when combined with our theoretical orientations, has led to a particular and identifiable distortion in the type of theory we produce. In the short time available, it is impossible to argue such a case fully. For this reason I shall assume a general familiarity on the part of the reader with the distinctions which interactionists and ethnomethodologists seek to make between their own interpretive enterprise, and that of the so-called normative sociologists, and I shall limit my commcnts on these categories to a few initial assertions 1. Again, rather than attempting an extremely sketchy analysis of the various theories of specialty and disciplinary development that are current, I shall confine my remarks to a discussion of my own recently published work ?. I do this, not because I believe that it is either especially good or bad, but rather because I believe that it, in its normative aspects, is typical of much work in the area. The special strengths and weaknesses of the writings of such authors

15 citations