Balon2019
| Balon2019 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Balon2019 |
| Author(s) | Jan Balon, John Holmwood |
| Title | The impossibility of sociology as a science; arguments from within the discipline |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Harvey Sacks, Harold Garfinkel, Foucault, Althusser, Sociology, Sacksian principles |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2019 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour |
| Volume | 49 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 334-347 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1111/jtsb.12208 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper addresses a key moment in the development of sociology when its status as a science was criticised from within by ethnomethodologists (Harvey Sacks and Harold Garfinkel), post‐Althusserian Marxists (Barry Hindess) and Michel Foucault. These criticisms seemed to come from different sides, but they converged in arguing their positions from the point of view of a proper conception of science through which mainstream sociology was found wanting. Neither secured its own position and each had a similar legacy of a form of interpretivism hostile both to scientific sociology and its critical project. The paper situates this moment and its legacy where both correspondence and coherence criteria for sociological knowledge claims come to be undermined.
Notes
