Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour最新文献

This special issue was based on a flagship panel of the 2022 International Association for Critical Realism (IACR) annual conference held at the Institute of Social Studies (ISS) in The Hague on realist complexity. The aim of this special issue is to capture and specify what Critical Realism (CR) can contribute to the literature on complexity. Against the background of previous attempts that have subsequently coalesced the two under the rubric of ‘Complex Realism’, the primary objective here takes stock of the various analytical shortcomings of ‘Complex Realism’ and aims instead to understand how CR scholars analytically treat complexity. Put differently, the contributors of this special issue problematize the amalgam between CR and complexity evident in ‘Complex Realism’ and ask instead how CR deals with complexity (Realist Complexity). In so doing, they present a variety of arguments and approaches which will be dealt with below. The next section will provide a short background on the origins of complexity sciences before it highlights both the tents and shortcoming of Complex Realism. The final section will provide a summary of all key contributors of this special issue.

Imran, M. H., & Zhai, Z. (2021). A critical review on the mimetic theory of René Girard: Politics, religion, and violence. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52(2), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12330.

The above article, published on 19 December 2021 in Wiley Online Library (Wiley Online Library), has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editors-in-Chief, Alex Gillespie and Doug Porpora, and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The retraction has been agreed due to concerns raised by multiple third parties that there is substantial conceptual overlap between this article and (1). An investigation by Wiley and the Editors-in-Chief supported this conclusion. The authors disagree with the retraction.

In the present article, we outline basic assumptions and conceptual tools for a sociology of existence. First, we address man's fundamental conditions of existence: that life's finitude and encounters with the uncertainty of existence are fundamental experiences that construct social relations. Second, we outline how existential meaning-making and the ability to cope with the unpredictability of life are dependent on power resources, where especially the resource poor may experience ‘existential nausea’. Third, we discuss how existential dilemmas may intensify under certain historical eras. Therefore, studying individuals' existential dilemmas is a tool to examine the dominant social issues at a particular time and place. Fourth, we elaborate on the importance of studying turning points during individuals' life courses, as existential meaning – or lack thereof – becomes particularly salient at these times. This includes an understanding that death and rebirth are experienced in the form of various endings and beginnings in everyday life. Fifth, and finally, we emphasize an analysis in which the direction of people's lives is conceptualized in a broad time perspective, where past, present, and future interact and influence life choices and social relations constructed during a lifetime.

In everyday discourse, and also in the academic literature, the expressions “regulatory interventions” (i.e. interventions intended to regulate behaviours) and “normative interventions” (i.e. interventions which set norms/rules) are usually assumed to be synonymous. From this perspective, any regulatory intervention is also normative, and vice versa. This article investigates the relationship between regulation and rules/norms in order to verify whether the “regulatory” and the “normative” aspects are intrinsically and essentially connected, as is usually thought (on the assumption that there is no regulation without rules and no rules without regulation).

This paper aims to discern, clarify, criticise, and advocate some uses of phenomenology in sociological research. Phenomenology is increasingly evoked or implicitly employed in sociological endeavours. Little attention, however, is paid to what is entailed in taking a phenomenological approach, and whether it is employed to advance empirical or theoretical knowledge. I build an analytic typology of different empirical and theoretical uses of phenomenology, criticise a range of these uses, and argue that other uses bear significant potential for the advancement of theoretical and empirical knowledge. The paper's main contribution lies in comparing and contrasting the many invocations of phenomenology in contemporary social scientific research to discern their benefits and shortcomings.