首页> 外文期刊>Qualitative Sociology >Disciplining an Unruly Field: Terrorism Experts and Theories of Scientific/Intellectual Production
【24h】

Disciplining an Unruly Field: Terrorism Experts and Theories of Scientific/Intellectual Production

机译:规管一个不守规矩的领域:恐怖主义专家和科学/知识生产理论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

“Terrorism” has proved to be a highly problematic object of expertise. Terrorism studies fails to conform to the most common sociological notions of what a field of intellectual production ought to look like, and has been described by participants and observers alike as a failure. Yet the study of terrorism is a booming field, whether measured in terms of funding, publications, or numbers of aspiring experts. This paper aims to explain, first, the disjuncture between terrorism studies in practice and the sociological literature on fields of intellectual production, and, second, the reasons for experts’ “rhetoric of failure” about their field. I suggest that terrorism studies, rather than conforming to the notion of an ideal-typical profession, discipline, or bounded “intellectual field,” instead represents an interstitial space of knowledge production. I further argue that the “rhetoric of failure” can be understood as a strategy through which terrorism researchers mobilize sociological theories of scientific/cultural fields as both an interpretive resource in their attempts to make sense of the apparent oddness of their field and their situation, and as schemas, or models, in their attempts to reshape the field. I conclude that sociologists ought to expand our vision to incorporate the many arenas of expertise that occupy interstitial spaces, moving and travelling between multiple fields.
机译:事实证明,“恐怖主义”是专业知识的一个极具问题的对象。恐怖主义研究未能符合最普遍的社会学观念,即知识生产领域应该是什么样的,参与者和观察家都将其描述为失败。然而,无论是从经费,出版物还是有抱负的专家的角度衡量,对恐怖主义的研究都是一个蓬勃发展的领域。本文的目的是首先解释在实践中进行的恐怖主义研究与关于知识生产领域的社会学文献之间的脱节,其次,其原因是专家对其领域进行“修辞失败”的原因。我建议,恐怖主义研究不是遵循理想典型的专业,学科或有限的“知识领域”的概念,而是代表知识生产的间隙空间。我进一步指出,“失败的修辞”可以理解为一种策略,通过这种策略,恐怖主义研究人员可以动员科学/文化领域的社会学理论,作为一种解释性资源,以试图弄清其领域和情况的明显怪异,并尝试将其作为架构或模型来重塑该领域。我得出的结论是,社会学家应该扩大我们的视野,以纳入占据间隙空间,在多个领域之间移动和传播的许多专业领域。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Qualitative Sociology》 |2011年第1期|p.1-19|共19页
  • 作者

    Lisa Stampnitzky;

  • 作者单位

    Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, Said Business School, Park End Street, Oxford, OX1 1HP, UK;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Terrorism; Experts; Knowledge; Boundary work;

    机译:恐怖主义;专家;知识;边界工作;
  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 01:33:52

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号