Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований
Опубликовано на портале: 08-09-2010Brice LeGall, Charles Soulie Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 83-97.
According to political and journalistic common sense, French universities are ill adapted to the new economic and social situation at home and abroad, and incapable of reform. We intend to counter this view by showing that, far from being an immobile behemoth as it is often described, the French university system—just like that of other European countries—has witnessed a silent revolution over the past twenty years, preparing it for the current reforms and, in particular, for the latest reform of its administration.
Опубликовано на портале: 13-10-2010Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 303-304.
Representatives of independent sociological centers operating in various Russian cities met in May 2004 (in Saint Petersburg), November 2005 (in Moscow), and March 2007 (in Irkutsk). At their first meeting, they decided to create a Convention of Independent Sociological Centers, and at the third meeting, they resolved to write and publish a Declaration expressing the principles and tasks of the association. In August-September 2008, the Convention organized the first Baikal International School of Social Research. In 2009, it launched a series of books on qualitative methods in the social sciences.
Difficulties of Prognosis [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 15-09-2010Liliya Sagitova Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 219-223.
The types of sociologies enumerated by Michael Burawoy develop and correlate with each other through a combination of several components. Firstly, there is the level of maturity of the channels through which social interests are articulated. Secondly, there are the specific, historically evolved features of the institution of publicity in a given region. Thirdly, there are the peculiarities of the social and political situation at a macro- and meso-level.
Fusing public sociology and policy sociology: the new goal of sociological professionalization? [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 10-09-2010Tatjana Zimenkova Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 227-228.
The lack of mutual recognition between different sociologies (in terms of topics, focus, methods, goals, and ethics) is a problem that is expressed on the surface through the use of terms such as “real sociologists” or “bad sociologists.” To sociologists, it is clear that no single discipline that may be called “sociology” exists. Public sociology does not have a “client” in the sense in which policy sociology does. Still, public sociology, especially organic public sociology, does have clients of a different nature, and the interests of these clients determine the work of public sociologists.
G. S. Batygin, L. A. Kozlova, E. M. Sviderski (Eds.) Sotsial’nye nauki v postsovetskoi Rossii [the social sciences in post-Soviet Russia] [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 13-10-2010Vera Sparschuh Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 290-291.
Book review: G. S. Batygin, L. A. Kozlova, E. M. Sviderski (Eds.) Sotsial’nye nauki v postsovetskoi Rossii [the social sciences in post-Soviet Russia]. Saint Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt, 2005. 416 pp. ISBN 5-8291- 0547-0.
Опубликовано на портале: 08-09-2010Alexander Bikbov Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 124-139.
In 2007, students at Moscow State University’s sociology department staged a rebellion against their department administration. This was probably the most remarkable event in the history of Russian sociology after the decree “On Advancing Marxist-Leninist Sociology’s Role in Solving the Key Problems of Soviet Society” finally gave the discipline fully legal status in 1988. The almost two decades between those two events were marked by a lack of intellectual breakthroughs that would have generated a noticeable professional, interdisciplinary, or public response. Against all expectations, professional observers contributed little to our understanding of post-Soviet society, even though sociologists themselves claimed that the late 1980s and early 1990s were an ideal period in which to observe social transformation.
Jim Clark, editor and publisher of Erving Goffman, Harold Garfinkel, Herbert Blumer, Talcott Parsons, and Robert Bellah, in conversation with Mischa Gabowitsch [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 09-09-2010Jim Clark, Mischa Gabowitsch Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 151-159.
Jim Clark (born 1931) was director of the University of California Press from 1977 to 2002. Before that, he worked as acquisitions editor in the social sciences at Prentice Hall, a large educational publisher, and vice president of Harper & Row, a major publishing house that later became part of HarperCollins. As an editor, he has worked with over 800 authors of books in the social sciences. The interview was recorded in Princeton, NJ, in June 2008, by Mischa Gabowitsch, editor-in-chief of Laboratorium and lecturer in Princeton University’s department of sociology, and revised by Clark and Gabowitsch in October 2008.
Опубликовано на портале: 07-09-2010Mischa Gabowitsch Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 13-19.
As its English subtitle indicates, Laboratorium is a Russian review of social research. It is not, however, primarily a journal of Russian Studies. To the extent that it addresses an international audience, its central task is to help integrate research on and from Russia into a global conversation about social reality and the disciplines that study it.
Ministerstvo Obrazovaniia i Nauki Rossiiskoi Federatsii; Buriatskii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet: Mongolii i Buriatiia: Geokul’turnye obrazy prostranstva. Issledovatel‘skii al‘manakh. [Mongolia and Buryatia: Geocultural images of space] [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 13-10-2010Ines Stolpe Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 287-289.
Book review: Ministerstvo Obrazovaniia i Nauki Rossiiskoi Federatsii; Buriatskii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet: Mongolii i Buriatiia: Geokul’turnye obrazy prostranstva. Issledovatel‘skii al‘manakh. [Mongolia and Buryatia: Geocultural images of space] Ulan-ude: Izdatel’stvo Buriatskogo Gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2006. ISBN 5-85213-932-7, 135 pages.
Опубликовано на портале: 10-09-2010Oksana Zaporozhets Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 224-226.
In the conversation about public sociology today we should discuss the actual experiences of public activity of different social scientists, artists, and activists, and also think about the competences required for such activity. This is more appropriate than abstract theorizing on the public nature of sociology or designing normative scenarios, for example by legislating that our mission is to turn the supposedly confused and incompetent activists of NGOs into professional sociologists (an idea that was expressed in one of the numerous debates on this topic).
"Public" sociology in Russia [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 10-09-2010Vasily Bushnev, Oleg Zhuravlev, Elena Moskovkina, Natalia Savelieva Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 205-207.
Public sociology, which translates the results of scholarly work into the public sphere, is only relevant where the knowledge so produced is autonomous. Sociologists must not be politicians. The production cycle of sociological research must be governed by a professional logic. The sociologist must not be a “total intellectual,” in Michel Foucault’s term. Michael Burawoy asks: “Sociology for what?” and “Sociology for whom?”
Опубликовано на портале: 09-09-2010Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 195-196.
The following virtual round-table discussion grew out of a seminar that took place in Saint Petersburg in September 2007. Michael Burawoy, who has spearheaded the debate on public sociology in the United States and globally in recent years, presented his ideas to a Russian audience. The seminar took place in the midst of what has become known as the “student revolt” at Moscow State University’s sociology department, and several of the student leaders took part in the debate. For the written version of the discussion, I suggested that Burawoy concentrate on different national types of sociology and offer his interpretation of the current state of Russian sociology in the context of public sociologies around the world.
Russian sociology aftter 1991: The institutional and intellectual dynamics of a “poor” discipline [статья]
Опубликовано на портале: 07-09-2010Michail M. Sokolov Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 58-64.
This paper approaches the sociological study of science by defining academic life as a “dual economy” of money and attention. Scientists, including social scientists, seek to maximize both their financial revenue and colleagues’ attention to their work. As in conventional economics, to receive attention from others one has first to invest some attention of one’s own. The two dimensions of academic life—monetary exchanges and the exchange of attention—are in no way independent of each other.
Опубликовано на портале: 15-09-2010Nikolay Mitrokhin Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 211-215.
Michael Burawoy distinguishes between professional, critical, policy, and public sociology, based on the main tasks and publics of sociological knowledge. Is this typology helpful in understanding the current state of Russian sociology? How are these four types correlated in Russia?
Опубликовано на портале: 15-09-2010Mikhail Rozhansky Laboratorium. Журнал социальных исследований. 2009. № 1. С. 216-218.
“Professional” and “academic” are not precisely synonymous; what is meant here, apparently, is “addressed to professionals.” If we are to free critical, policy, and public sociology from standards of scholarly professionalism, we may just as well give up any hope for the future of social research in Russia. In that case, sociology will remain an activity based in offices and libraries. We would give a stamp of approval to a journalistic style in critical and public sociology, and make academic sociology so speculative that theoretical work would be divorced from “practical reason.”