{"title":"社会学话语中的正义:语义、经验、历史和概念上的挑战","authors":"I. Trotsuk","doi":"10.17323/1728-192X-2019-1-218-249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the key features of social sciences and humanities distinguishing them from technical and natural sciences are the frequent intersections of their terminology with everyday discourse. Some social concepts have completely different interpretations in sociological discourse and everyday life, with the words “field” and “panel” as good examples. However, the majority of similar concepts of everyday life and sociological research have quite the same content. The word “justice” and its derivatives stand out in this set of terms, for hardly any other concept in human history is saturated with political connotations, or requires little additional explanation when used in social-economic debates or military conflicts. As a result, the word “justice” is widely used in all “life-worlds” (i.e., according to A. Schütz, justice seems to be both a ‘first-order construct’ and a ‘second-order construct’), which complicates its unambiguous conceptual and empirical interpretations in sociological research. The article was supposed to be a review of two books, A History of Justice: From the Pluralism of Forums to the Modern Dualism of Conscience and Law by P. Prodi, and The Idea of Justice by A. Sen, providing a clearer conceptual definition of justice. However, it turned into reflections with some theoretical and empirical examples on why such searches in sociology are important and inevitable, but are unlikely to end with a satisfying result. This does not make such searches meaningless, but rather utopian in nature, and essential for the self-identification of the discipline through the questioning of its own conceptual foundations.","PeriodicalId":102221,"journal":{"name":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Justice in Sociological Discourse: Semantic, Empirical, Historical, and Conceptual Challenges\",\"authors\":\"I. Trotsuk\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/1728-192X-2019-1-218-249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the key features of social sciences and humanities distinguishing them from technical and natural sciences are the frequent intersections of their terminology with everyday discourse. Some social concepts have completely different interpretations in sociological discourse and everyday life, with the words “field” and “panel” as good examples. However, the majority of similar concepts of everyday life and sociological research have quite the same content. The word “justice” and its derivatives stand out in this set of terms, for hardly any other concept in human history is saturated with political connotations, or requires little additional explanation when used in social-economic debates or military conflicts. As a result, the word “justice” is widely used in all “life-worlds” (i.e., according to A. Schütz, justice seems to be both a ‘first-order construct’ and a ‘second-order construct’), which complicates its unambiguous conceptual and empirical interpretations in sociological research. The article was supposed to be a review of two books, A History of Justice: From the Pluralism of Forums to the Modern Dualism of Conscience and Law by P. Prodi, and The Idea of Justice by A. Sen, providing a clearer conceptual definition of justice. However, it turned into reflections with some theoretical and empirical examples on why such searches in sociology are important and inevitable, but are unlikely to end with a satisfying result. This does not make such searches meaningless, but rather utopian in nature, and essential for the self-identification of the discipline through the questioning of its own conceptual foundations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":102221,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192X-2019-1-218-249\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192X-2019-1-218-249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
社会科学和人文科学区别于技术科学和自然科学的一个关键特征是它们的术语与日常话语的频繁交叉。一些社会概念在社会学话语和日常生活中有着完全不同的解释,“场”和“面板”就是很好的例子。然而,大多数日常生活和社会学研究的类似概念具有相当相同的内容。“正义”一词及其衍生词在这组术语中十分突出,因为人类历史上几乎没有任何其他概念充满政治内涵,或者在社会经济辩论或军事冲突中使用时几乎不需要额外的解释。因此,“正义”一词被广泛应用于所有的“生活世界”(即,根据a . sch茨的观点,正义似乎既是“一阶结构”也是“二阶结构”),这使得社会学研究中对其明确的概念和经验解释变得复杂。这篇文章本应是对两本书——《正义史:从论坛的多元主义到良心与法律的现代二元论》(P. Prodi)和a . Sen的《正义理念》(The Idea of Justice)——的评论,这两本书为正义提供了更清晰的概念定义。然而,它变成了一些理论和实证例子的反思,为什么社会学中的这种搜索是重要的和不可避免的,但不太可能以令人满意的结果结束。这并没有使这样的研究毫无意义,而是在本质上是乌托邦式的,并且通过对其自身概念基础的质疑,对学科的自我认同至关重要。
Justice in Sociological Discourse: Semantic, Empirical, Historical, and Conceptual Challenges
One of the key features of social sciences and humanities distinguishing them from technical and natural sciences are the frequent intersections of their terminology with everyday discourse. Some social concepts have completely different interpretations in sociological discourse and everyday life, with the words “field” and “panel” as good examples. However, the majority of similar concepts of everyday life and sociological research have quite the same content. The word “justice” and its derivatives stand out in this set of terms, for hardly any other concept in human history is saturated with political connotations, or requires little additional explanation when used in social-economic debates or military conflicts. As a result, the word “justice” is widely used in all “life-worlds” (i.e., according to A. Schütz, justice seems to be both a ‘first-order construct’ and a ‘second-order construct’), which complicates its unambiguous conceptual and empirical interpretations in sociological research. The article was supposed to be a review of two books, A History of Justice: From the Pluralism of Forums to the Modern Dualism of Conscience and Law by P. Prodi, and The Idea of Justice by A. Sen, providing a clearer conceptual definition of justice. However, it turned into reflections with some theoretical and empirical examples on why such searches in sociology are important and inevitable, but are unlikely to end with a satisfying result. This does not make such searches meaningless, but rather utopian in nature, and essential for the self-identification of the discipline through the questioning of its own conceptual foundations.