자연주의적 탐구조사(Naturalistic Inquiry)

We may not be able to make you love reading, but archaeology of knowledge will lead you to love reading starting from now. Book is the window to open the new world. The world that you want is in the better stage and level. World will always guide you to even the prestige stage of the life. You know, this is some of how reading will give you the kindness. In this case, more books you read more knowledge you know, but it can mean also the bore is full.

The archaeology of knowledge

Introduction - after the science question in feminism. Part 1 Science: feminism confronts the sciences how the women's movement benefits science - two views why \"physics\" is a bad model for physics. Part 2 Epistemology: what is feminist epistemology \"strong objectivity\" and socially situated knowledge feminist epistemology in and after the enlightenment. Part 3 \"Others\": \"...and race?\" - the science question in global feminism common histories, common destinies - science in the first and third worlds \"real science\" thinking from the perspective of lesbian lives reinventing ourselves as other Conclusion - what is a feminist science.

Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives

The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1, Reason and the Rationalization of Society

BRUNO LATOUR, The pasteurization of France, trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law, Cambridge, Mass., and London, Harvard University Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. 273, £23.95. GEORGES CANGUILHEM, Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences, trans. Arthur Goldhammer, Cambridge, Mass., and London, The MIT Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. xi, 160, £17.95. Bruno Latour has written a wonderfully funny book about himself. It is difficult, however, to summarize a text committed to the view that \"Nothing is, by itself, either reducible or irreducible to anything else\", (p. 158). In Latour's opinion, the common view that sociologists of knowledge and scientists are opposed is incorrect. Both groups, according to Latour, are the authors of identical mistakes: reductionism and, relatedly, attempting to conjoin (in the instance of the sociologist) science and society, or (in the instance of the scientist) keeping them apart. For Latour, there are only forces or resistances which different groups encounter and attempt to conquer by forming alliances. These groups, however, are not simply the actors of conventional sociology. They include, for example, microbes, the discovery of the Pasteurians, with which they have populated our world and which we must now take notice of in any encounter or war in which we engage. War is a fundamental metaphor for Latour, since in a war or a battle clashes of armies are later called the \"victory\" of a Napoleon or a Kutuzov. Likewise, he argues, the Pasteurization of France can be viewed as a battle, with its field and its myriad contestants, in which opposing sides attempted to mould and coerce various forces of resistance. Strangely, he points out, the outcome of this huge battle, the labour and struggle of these masses, we attribute to the scientific genius of Pasteur. Pasteur's genius, however, says Latour, lay not in science (for this could be yet another way of making science and society distinct) but as strategist. Pasteur was able to cross disciplinary lines, recruiting allies to laboratory science by persuading them that they were recruiting him. This was possible because, like the armies in battle, they had already done the work of the general. Thus Pasteur's microbiology, which might conventionally be seen as a whole new science, can also be construed as a brilliant reformulation of all that preceded it and made it possible. Hygienists seized on the work of the Pasteurians and the two rapidly became powerful allies because \"The time that they [the hygienists] had made was now working for them\" (p. 52). French physicians, on the other hand, resisted recruitment, since for them it meant enslavement. Finally, however, they recruited the Pasteurians to their enterprise. Pasteurian public health was turned into a triumph of medicine. It is impossible to read this book and not substitute Latour for Pasteur. At the head of his own army, increasingly enlarged by the recruitment of allies, Latour now presents us, in his own language, with something we have made, or at least made possible. The cynic might say, using the old jibe against sociologists, that Latour has explained to us in his own language everything we knew anyway. Retorting thus, however, would be to unselfconsciously make an ally of Latour and miss the point by a narrow margin that might as well be a million miles. Latour says all this much more clearly (and certainly more wittily) than any review. Read it, but beware; in spite of Latour's strictures about irreducibility, the text is not what it seems. This is a recruitment brochure: Bruno needs you. Among the many historians whom Latour convicts by quotation of mistaking the general for the army, Pasteur for all the forces at work in French society, is Georges Canguilhem. Latour uses two quotes from Canguilhem, both taken from the original French version of Ideology and rationality in the life sciences, first published in 1977. Reading Canguilhem after Latour induces a feeling akin to culture shock. Astonishingly, Canguilhem seems almost Anglo-American. Anyone familiar with Canguilhem's epistemological universe would hardly be surprised to discover that Latour finds in it perspectives different from his own. After all, Canguilhem remains committed to the epistemologically distinct entity science or, better still, sciences. Likewise he employs distinctions between science and ideology, as in Spencerian ideology and Darwinian science, which will seem familiar, possibly jaded to English-reading eyes. His text is liberally seeded with unLatourian expressions, including injunctions to distinguish \"between ideology and science\" (p. 39), lamentations that eighteenth-century medicine \"squandered its energy in the erection of systems\" (p. 53), rejoicing that physiology \"liberated itself' from classical anatomy (p. 54), and regret that \"Stahl's influence ... seriously impeded experimental

/pdf/bruno-latour-the-pasteurization-of-france-trans-alan-syp9mg0jqd.pdf

Bruno Latour, The pasteurization of France , trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law, Cambridge, Mass., and London, Harvard University Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. 273, £23.95. - Georges Canguilhem, Ideology and rationality in the history of the life sciences , trans. Arthur Goldhammer, Cambridge, Mass., and London, The MIT Press, 1988, 8vo, pp. xi, 160, £17.95.

This paper is an examination of criteria for qualitative social research. It starts from the premise that productive criteria can only be determined by relying strictly on the specific functional properties of interpretive and reconstructive approaches. Five criteria are proposed: Adequacy is a mode of defining the research topic by taking the empirical field seriously while maintaining distance from it by generating tension through theoretical reasoning. Empirical saturation designates the criterion that is to be observed by basing work on empirical field data, while theoretical pervasiveness addresses the quality of the theoretical relations in which the research is articulated and, consequently, stimulated. Textual performance refers to composing texts which achieve high quality communication with their recipients. Finally, originality is the criterion according to which the claim to research innovation may be examined.

/pdf/gutekriterien-qualitativer-sozialforschung-ein-bqs3qichdv.pdf

Gütekriterien qualitativer Sozialforschung. Ein Diskussionsanstoß

List of Figures Foreword Introduction On field access Rendering case-making observable Outlook 1. A case of assault: The rise and fall of an alibi The ontological versions of the alibi-story and its analysability The rise of the alibi Intermezzo The story's decline Towards the duality of mobilisation 2. Framing law-in-action Where and when is the field? Event and process in Social Theory Eventful process, processed events Weighing event and process Outlook: the adversarial procedure as eventful process 3. A case of indecent assault: Fitting sleep-walking expertise in Interrogating a single case Expert evidence in criminal proceedings Sleep-walking expertise and its relevant other knowledges Discussion: Distributed knowing and judicial decision-making 4. File-work and procedural care Styles of file-work in a criminal law firm Good reasons for different styles of file-work Conclusion: Legal care in context 5. A case of wounding with intent: The barrister's day in court Before trial The barrister's work during trial The closing speech Conclusion: The minutiae of case-representation 6. Procedural resources and procedural infrastructure The court The file The story Towards procedural infrastructure 7. A case of murder: No regret! Direct and indirect moralising The moralising sites in a Crown Court case Discussion: Characteristics and rationale of indirect moralising 8. The case in the case-system The case as tripartite sign Case, fact-sensitive Case, ruled and ruling Case, decision-oriented The archive of the case-system Off the case: Components in isolation Conclusion: The micro-foundations of adversarialism Mechanisms of case-making Complexities of case-making Epilogue References Index

Adversarial Case-Making

Procedure is not just a programme or a nexus of formalities. It is something done by legal experts and lay participants in a highly concerted ensemble. Procedure frames and advances all law-relevant activities. This book, written by three authors from different disciplinary backgrounds, provides an in-depth comparison of criminal defence work in different legal cultures. Via an ethnographic comparison, this book also shows how defence work responds to the challenges of different procedural regimes and how it contributes to their individual outcomes. Criminal Defence and Procedure opens up new horizons for legal comparison, inviting novel understandings of procedural law as well as possibilities of legal reform.

Criminal Defence and Procedure: Comparative Ethnographies in the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States

Ethnographen und Ethnographinnen schlagen sich mit der Frage herum, wie solche Episoden, also das aktuell Beobachtete und per Feldnotizen Erinnerte, kulturelle Muster oder gar gesellschaftliche Strukturen verraten. Ihre Analysen fuhren hier Symbole, Rituale, Common Sense, etc. ins Feld, um Verallgemeinerungen zu wagen: von Bedeutungsgehalten zum kulturellen Text, vom Geschehen zu Praxismustern, vom Vollzug zu Ethnomethoden, vom „knowing how“ zur „epistemic culture“, von den Regeln zur institutionellen Ordnung. Objekte, wie die vom Anwalt gefuhrte Akte im Allgemeinen und seine „diary notes“ im Besonderen (Scheffer 2010), erfullen hier eine aquivalente Funktion.

Die trans-sequentielle Analyse – und ihre formativen Objekte

Analytical ethnography does not presume a principal analytical frame It does not know (yet) where and when the field takes place Rather, the ethnographer is in search for appropriate spatiotemporal frames in correspondence with the occurrences in the field Accordingly, the author organizes a dialogue between conceptual frames and his various empirical accounts He confronts snapshots of English Crown Court proceedings with models of event and process from micro-sociology and macro-sociology A range of–more or less early or late, relevant or irrelevant, contingent or predetermined–processual events serves as the vantage point to access event and process relations In this line, Crown Court proceedings serve as an introductory and exemplary field for analytical ethnography, because they involve both: (strong) events and their process and (strong) processes and their events

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/27642792.pdf

Thomas Scheffer

Papers

Gütekriterien qualitativer Sozialforschung. Ein Diskussionsanstoß

Adversarial Case-Making

Criminal Defence and Procedure: Comparative Ethnographies in the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States

Die trans-sequentielle Analyse – und ihre formativen Objekte

Event and Process: An Exercise in Analytical Ethnography