信前的全球不平等:伊曼纽尔·沃勒斯坦的贡献

Socio Pub Date : 2021-04-15 DOI:10.4000/SOCIO.10999
Manuela Boatcă
{"title":"信前的全球不平等:伊曼纽尔·沃勒斯坦的贡献","authors":"Manuela Boatcă","doi":"10.4000/SOCIO.10999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-system approach was instrumental in revealing sociology’s theoretical and methodological blind spots and in formulating a comprehensive framework for the study of global inequalities. In doing so, it anticipated both the critique of Eurocentrism and methodological nationalism put forth by transnational and postcolonial approaches as well as the debates over the rise in global inequalities by several decades. I trace this analytical primacy to several factors: first, to world-systems analysis’ methodological shift from the nation-state to the entire capitalist world-economy as an early global sociology; second, to the relation between the methodological shift to the epistemological critique and their role in Wallerstein’s early approach to global inequalities. Finally, I address the relationship between the self-definition of world-systems analysis as a form of protest against mainstream social science (rather than as a theory) and the theoretical and political filiations with postcolonial and decolonial approaches in order to show how they contributed together to the prominence of global inequalities as a topic.","PeriodicalId":31312,"journal":{"name":"Socio","volume":"1 1","pages":"71-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global inequalities avant la lettre: Immanuel Wallerstein’s contribution\",\"authors\":\"Manuela Boatcă\",\"doi\":\"10.4000/SOCIO.10999\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-system approach was instrumental in revealing sociology’s theoretical and methodological blind spots and in formulating a comprehensive framework for the study of global inequalities. In doing so, it anticipated both the critique of Eurocentrism and methodological nationalism put forth by transnational and postcolonial approaches as well as the debates over the rise in global inequalities by several decades. I trace this analytical primacy to several factors: first, to world-systems analysis’ methodological shift from the nation-state to the entire capitalist world-economy as an early global sociology; second, to the relation between the methodological shift to the epistemological critique and their role in Wallerstein’s early approach to global inequalities. Finally, I address the relationship between the self-definition of world-systems analysis as a form of protest against mainstream social science (rather than as a theory) and the theoretical and political filiations with postcolonial and decolonial approaches in order to show how they contributed together to the prominence of global inequalities as a topic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Socio\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"71-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Socio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4000/SOCIO.10999\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/SOCIO.10999","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,伊曼纽尔·沃勒斯坦的世界体系方法有助于揭示社会学的理论和方法盲点,并为研究全球不平等制定了一个全面的框架。在这样做的过程中,它预见了跨国和后殖民方法提出的对欧洲中心主义和方法论民族主义的批评,以及几十年来关于全球不平等加剧的辩论。我将这种分析的首要地位追溯到几个因素:首先,作为早期全球社会学,世界体系分析的方法论从民族国家转向整个资本主义世界经济;第二,方法论转向认识论批判与它们在沃勒斯坦早期全球不平等研究方法中的作用之间的关系。最后,我将讨论世界体系分析的自我定义作为一种对主流社会科学的抗议形式(而不是作为一种理论)与后殖民和非殖民方法的理论和政治联系之间的关系,以展示它们如何共同促进全球不平等作为一个主题的突出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Global inequalities avant la lettre: Immanuel Wallerstein’s contribution
This article argues that Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-system approach was instrumental in revealing sociology’s theoretical and methodological blind spots and in formulating a comprehensive framework for the study of global inequalities. In doing so, it anticipated both the critique of Eurocentrism and methodological nationalism put forth by transnational and postcolonial approaches as well as the debates over the rise in global inequalities by several decades. I trace this analytical primacy to several factors: first, to world-systems analysis’ methodological shift from the nation-state to the entire capitalist world-economy as an early global sociology; second, to the relation between the methodological shift to the epistemological critique and their role in Wallerstein’s early approach to global inequalities. Finally, I address the relationship between the self-definition of world-systems analysis as a form of protest against mainstream social science (rather than as a theory) and the theoretical and political filiations with postcolonial and decolonial approaches in order to show how they contributed together to the prominence of global inequalities as a topic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
Exclure, asservir, purifier Racisme et antisémitisme contemporains : métamorphoses, continuités et discontinuités Jean-Paul II et les Juifs Mourir de vieillesse augmente-t-il le risque de mal mourir ? Race et identité au Japon
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1