Topic
Social theory
About: Social theory is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 11421 publications have been published within this topic receiving 624898 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Book•
11 Jan 2010
TL;DR: Social capital is dead: Long Live Whatever Come Next as discussed by the authors... is a collection of articles about the history of social capital from Rational Choice to McDonald's. But it is not the most relevant to our work.
Abstract: 1 Introduction 2 From Rational Choice to McDonaldisation 3 The Short History of Social Capital 4 The BBI Syndrome 5 Social Capital versus Social History 6 Social Capital is Dead: Long Live Whatever Comes Next 7 Management Studies Goes to McDonald's 8 Degradation without Limit 9 W(h)ither Social Capital? Notes Bibliography Index
230 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: Game theory is central to understanding human behavior and relevant to all of the behavioral sciences, from biology and economics, to anthropology and political science as mentioned in this paper. But as The Bounds of Reason demonstrates, game theory alone cannot fully explain human behaviour and should instead complement other key concepts championed by the behavioral disciplines.
Abstract: Game theory is central to understanding human behavior and relevant to all of the behavioral sciences—from biology and economics, to anthropology and political science. However, as The Bounds of Reason demonstrates, game theory alone cannot fully explain human behavior and should instead complement other key concepts championed by the behavioral disciplines. Herbert Gintis shows that just as game theory without broader social theory is merely technical bravado, so social theory without game theory is a handicapped enterprise. This edition has been thoroughly revised and updated. Reinvigorating game theory, The Bounds of Reason offers innovative thinking for the behavioral sciences.
230 citations
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: The first issue of Subjectivity as mentioned in this paper explores the social, cultural, historical, and material processes, dynamics and structures of human experience as topic, problem and resource, including cultural studies, sociology, social theory, science and technology studies, geography, anthropology, gender and feminist studies and psychology.
Abstract: Welcome to the first launch issue of Subjectivity, previously the International Journal of Critical Psychology Subjectivity is an international, transdisciplinary journal that will explore the social, cultural, historical and material processes, dynamics and structures of human experience As topic, problem and resource, notions of subjectivity are relevant to many disciplines, including cultural studies, sociology, social theory, science and technology studies, geography, anthropology, gender and feminist studies and psychology The journal will bring together scholars from across the social sciences and the humanities in a collaborative project to identify the processes by which subjectivities are produced, explore subjectivity as a locus of social change, and examine how emerging subjectivities remake our social worlds Our aim, then, is a re-prioritization of subjectivity as a primary category of social, cultural, psychological, historical and political analysis
229 citations
TL;DR: Galtung's four-cell scheme is not merely a condensation of Boulding's eight abstract types, but rather a partial condensation combined with the addition of new types as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: classification. For example, industrial conflict (employer vs. employed) can appear under any of the abstract types, since either party can be a person, group, or organization (Boulding, 1962, p. 213). International conflict can fall under either homogeneous or heterogeneous organization conflict, depending on whether the parties (which may be tribes, feudal states, universal agricultural empires, industrial powers, or superpowers) are equal, unequal, or hopelessly unequal (pp. 227-229). The conflict of ideological systems is partly ecological, partly organizational (p. 278). In Boulding’s view, these empirical types (which do not represent an exhaustive list) are different enough from each other to require separate treatment. Whether this dual classification implies 8 -f4 special theories, 8 X 4 special theories, or some intermediate or larger number, is not at all clear. The mode of abstraction represented in Boulding’s eight-type scheme has been carried a step further. One need only distinguish two types of parties-individuals vs. collective entities (e.g., Sorokin’s distinction between persons and groups). Similarly, the structural relations between parties can be reduced to a simple dichotomy : either the conflicting parties are members of a larger system or else they are separate, autonomous entities which happen to interact in a common environment. This latter distinction has appeared (under various labels) in many schemes: distinctions such as those between intragroup and intergroup conflict (Simmel, 1955; Coser, 1956), intraparty and interparty conflict (Mack and Snyder, 1957), conflict within a social unit and conflict between social units (Levinger, 1957), or internal conflict (&dquo;quandaries&dquo;) and conflicts between parties (Boulding, 1957), all reflect the same basic dichotomy. By combining these two basic dichotomies, one arrives at a simple classification containing four types of conflict, as illustrated by Galtung (1965b, p. 348), who presents the following table: By ignoring the differences among concrete types which could appear in the bottom row, this table implies a smaller number of special theories than any scheme so far discussed. Galtung’s four-cell scheme is not merely a condensation of Boulding’s eight abstract types, but rather a partial condensation combined with the addition of new types. On one axis (nature of parties), Galtung has simply ignored Boulding’s distinction between groups and organizations, replacing these with a single category, i.e., &dquo;collectivities.&dquo; Furthermore, he ignores the distinction between homogeneous and heterogeneous pairs of parties. The result is that one of Boulding’s types of conflict (interpersonal) is retained in Galtung’s scheme, while the remaining seven types are apparently subsumed under a single category (intersystem, collective level). Thus Galtung’s scheme reduces Boulding’s eight types to only two by ignoring certain distinctions. On the other axis (structural relations between parties), Galtung introduces new types by attending to an aspect (intrasystem vs. intersystem) which is at best only implicit in Boulding’s scheme. Thus intrapersonal conflict is not one of Boulding’s eight types (even though he does discuss intrapersonal conflict as a factor which influences the behavior of indi-
229 citations
TL;DR: Family, marriage, financial and moral consequences of the social experience of epilepsy support the conceptualization of chronic illness as possessing a social course, and application of concepts of delegitimation, sociosomatic processes, coping as resistance, and the cultural ontology of suffering illustrate other ways that social theory is useful in research on chronic illness and disability.
229 citations