[almost An Autobiography: A Study Of Social Scientists In Health Based On The Lattes Curriculum].

Among the various ways of adopting the biographical approach, we used the curriculum vitaes (CVs) of Brazilian researchers who work as social scientists in health as our research material. These CVs are part of the Lattes Platform of CNPq - the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, which includes Research and Institutional Directories. We analyzed 238 CVs for this study. The CVs contain, among other things, the following information: professional qualifications, activities and projects, academic production, participation in panels for the evaluation of theses and dissertations, research centers and laboratories and a summarized autobiography. In this work there is a brief review of the importance of autobiography for the social sciences, emphasizing the CV as a form of autobiographical practice. We highlight some results, such as it being a group consisting predominantly of women, graduates in social sciences, anthropology, sociology or political science, with postgraduate degrees. The highest concentration of social scientists is located in Brazil's southern and southeastern regions. In some institutions the main activities of social scientists are as teachers and researchers with great thematic diversity in research.

[the Teaching Of Social Sciences In Health: Between Practice And Theory].

The models of teaching social sciences and clinical practice are insufficient for the needs of practical-reflective teaching of social sciences applied to health. The scope of this article is to reflect on the challenges and perspectives of social science education for health professionals. In the 1950s the important movement bringing together social sciences and the field of health began, however weak credentials still prevail. This is due to the low professional status of social scientists in health and the ill-defined position of the social sciences professionals in the health field. It is also due to the scant importance attributed by students to the social sciences, the small number of professionals and the colonization of the social sciences by the biomedical culture in the health field. Thus, the professionals of social sciences applied to health are also faced with the need to build an identity, even after six decades of their presence in the field of health. This is because their ambivalent status has established them as a partial, incomplete and virtual presence, requiring a complex survival strategy in the nebulous area between social sciences and health.

Scientists as policy-makers: Towards a new partnership

There is an urgent need to link social science research with policy making to address many key issues confronting countries across the globe. Policy makers need the benefit of social science research which is relevant, timely, transdisciplinary, methodologically capable of capturing global and local trends, swift to respond to fundamental issues, and offering findings which are clearly articulated, effectively disseminated, and oriented to outcomes. For this a new partnership is needed between social scientists and policy makers. We can gain a clearer picture of the nature of this desired partnership by probing the dichotomy between the world of science and the world of policy making. The experience of UNESCO and its programme Management of Social Transformations provides some valuable lessons.

Between Equity and Differentiation: An Analytical Schema of the Social Function of Education

The educational sphere has an internal function relatively agreed by social scientists. Nonetheless, the contribution that educational systems provide to the society (i.e., their social function) does not have the same degree of consensus. Taking into consideration such theoretical precedent, the current article raises an analytical schema to grasp the social function of education considering a sociological perspective. Starting from the assumption that there is an intrinsic relationship between the internal and social functions of social systems, we suggest there are particular stratification determinants modifying the internal pedagogical function of education, which impact on its social function by creating simultaneous conditions of equity and differentiation. Throughout the paper this social function is considered a paradoxical mechanism. We highlight how this paradoxical dynamic is deployed in different structural levels of the educational sphere. Additionally, we discuss eventual consequences of this paradoxical social function for the inclusion possibilities that educational systems offer to individuals.

Precarious Work: Agenda and Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility

Precarious work, in contrast to regular, permanent wage work, is commonly associated to insecure and unstable, and often poor quality jobs. The concept of precarious work relates either to a socioeconomic group which allows one to refer it to a "class in itself," or as - pursued more recently - to the precarization process which results in a growing fragmentation of societal structures. Common to both conceptions is that they refer to the exposition of workers to employment instability, limited access to legal and union protection, socially irresponsible and discriminating employment practices, and social and economic vulnerability in general. The present contribution provides an overview of some key issues and future directions of research on precarious work relevant to CSR researchers, policy-makers, and social scientists.

Rerum cognoscere causas: part I - How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

This is the first half of a two-part paper which deals with the social theoretic assumptions underlying system dynamics. The motivation is that clarification in this area can help mainstream social scientists to understand how our field relates to their literature, methods and concerns. Part I has two main sections. The aim of the first is to answer the question: How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories? The theoretic assumptions of the field are seldom explicit but rather are implicit in its practice. The range of system dynamics practice is therefore considered and related to a framework - widely used in both operational research (OR) and systems science - that organises the assumptions behind traditional social theoretic paradigms. Distinct and surprisingly varied groupings of practice are identified, making it difficult to place system dynamics in any one paradigm with any certainty. The difficulties of establishing a social theoretic home for system dynamics are exemplified in the second main section. This is done by considering the question: Is system dynamics deterministic? An analysis shows that attempts to relate system dynamics to strict notions of voluntarism or determinism quickly indicate that the field does not fit with either pole of this dichotomous, and strictly paradigmatic, view. Part I therefore concludes that definitively placing system dynamics with respect to traditional social theories is highly problematic. The scene is therefore set for Part II of the paper, which proposes an innovative and potentially fruitful resolution to this problem.

Para uma ciência geral da complexidade social

O texto, inspirándose nas formulações de Edgard Morin, realiza um diagnóstico que atribui a perda de contemporaneidade da universidade à sua incapacidade de construir saberes unitários e universalistas que garantam o enfrentamento das incertezas do conhecimento e criem formas novas de entendimento do mundo. Nessa linha, questiona aqueles que atrelam o sentido do futuro, exclusivamente, ao desenvolvimento técnico, à capacidade do homem dominar a natureza e à ação demiúrgica do Estado. Insiste também quanto à necessidade de se ultrapassar o referencial antropocêntrico, cobrando dos cientistas sociais uma postura de superação da política de fragmentação e de especialização crescentes a que eles têm se submetido.

A Tool Box Half Full: How Social Science can Help Solve Human–Wildlife Conflict

There is a growing recognition among wildlife managers that focusing management on wildlife often provides a temporary fix to human–wildlife conflicts, whereas changing human behavior can provide long-term solutions. Human dimensions research of wildlife conflicts frequently focuses on stakeholders’ characteristics, problem identification, and acceptability of management, and less frequently on human behavior and evaluation of management actions to change that behavior. Consequently, little information exists to assess overall success of management. We draw on our experience studying human–bear conflicts, and argue for more human dimensions studies that focus on change in human behavior to measure management success. We call for help from social scientists to conduct applied experiments utilizing two methods, direct observation and self-reported data, to measure change in behavior. We are optimistic these approaches will help fill the managers’ tool box and lead to better integration of human dimensions into human–wildlife conflict management.

Semiotic Analysis in the Study of Social Work

Research and professional practices have the joint aim of re-structuring the preconceived notions of reality. They both want to gain the understanding about social reality. Social workers use their professional competence in order to grasp the reality of their clients, while researchers’ pursuit is to open the secrecies of the research material. Development and research are now so intertwined and inherent in almost all professional practices that making distinctions between practising, developing and researching has become difficult and in many aspects irrelevant. Moving towards research-based practices is possible and it is easily applied within the framework of the qualitative research approach (Dominelli 2005, 235; Humphries 2005, 280). Social work can be understood as acts and speech acts crisscrossing between social workers and clients. When trying to catch the verbal and non-verbal hints of each others’ behaviour, the actors have to do a lot of interpretations in a more or less uncertain mental landscape. Our point of departure is the idea that the study of social work practices requires tools which effectively reveal the internal complexity of social work (see, for example, Adams & Dominelli & Payne 2005, 294 – 295). The boom of qualitative research methodologies in recent decades is associated with much profound the rupture in humanities, which is called the linguistic turn (Rorty 1967). The idea that language is not transparently mediating our perceptions and thoughts about reality, but on the contrary it constitutes it was new and even confusing to many social scientists. Nowadays we have got used to read research reports which have applied different branches of discursive analyses or narratologic or semiotic approaches. Although differences are sophisticated between those orientations they share the idea of the predominance of language. Despite the lively research work of today’s social work and the research-minded atmosphere of social work practice, semiotics has rarely applied in social work research. However, social work as a communicative practice concerns symbols, metaphors and all kinds of the representative structures of language. Those items are at the core of semiotics, the science of signs, and the science which examines people using signs in their mutual interaction and their endeavours to make the sense of the world they live in, their semiosis. When thinking of the practice of social work and doing the research of it, a number of interpretational levels ought to be passed before reaching the research phase in social work. First of all, social workers have to interpret their clients’ situations, which will be recorded in the files. In some very rare cases those past situations will be reflected in discussions or perhaps interviews or put under the scrutiny of some researcher in the future. Each and every new observation adds its own flavour to the mixture of meanings. Social workers have combined their observations with previous experience and professional knowledge, furthermore, the situation on hand also influences the reactions. In addition, the interpretations made by social workers over the course of their daily working routines are never limited to being part of the personal process of the social worker, but are also always inherently cultural. The work aiming at social change is defined by the presence of an initial situation, a specific goal, and the means and ways of achieving it, which are – or which should be – agreed upon by the social worker and the client in situation which is unique and at the same time socially-driven. Because of the inherent plot-based nature of social work, the practices related to it can be analysed as stories (see Dominelli 2005, 234), given, of course, that they are signifying and told by someone. The research of the practices is concentrating on impressions, perceptions, judgements, accounts, documents etc. All these multifarious elements can be scrutinized as textual corpora, but not whatever textual material. In semiotic analysis, the material studied is characterised as verbal or textual and loaded with meanings. We present a contribution of research methodology, semiotic analysis, which has to our mind at least implicitly references to the social work practices. Our examples of semiotic interpretation have been picked up from our dissertations (Laine 2005; Saurama 2002). The data are official documents from the archives of a child welfare agency and transcriptions of the interviews of shelter employees. These data can be defined as stories told by the social workers of what they have seen and felt. The official documents present only fragmentations and they are often written in passive form. (Saurama 2002, 70.) The interviews carried out in the shelters can be described as stories where the narrators are more familiar and known. The material is characterised by the interaction between the interviewer and interviewee. The levels of the story and the telling of the story become apparent when interviews or documents are examined with the use of semiotic tools. The roots of semiotic interpretation can be found in three different branches; the American pragmatism, Saussurean linguistics in Paris and the so called formalism in Moscow and Tartu; however in this paper we are engaged with the so called Parisian School of semiology which prominent figure was A. J. Greimas. The Finnish sociologists Pekka Sulkunen and Jukka Törrönen (1997a; 1997b) have further developed the ideas of Greimas in their studies on socio-semiotics, and we lean on their ideas. In semiotics social reality is conceived as a relationship between subjects, observations, and interpretations and it is seen mediated by natural language which is the most common sign system among human beings (Mounin 1985; de Saussure 2006; Sebeok 1986). Signification is an act of associating an abstract context (signified) to some physical instrument (signifier). These two elements together form the basic concept, the “sign”, which never constitutes any kind of meaning alone. The meaning will be comprised in a distinction process where signs are being related to other signs. In this chain of signs, the meaning becomes diverged from reality. (Greimas 1980, 28; Potter 1996, 70; de Saussure 2006, 46-48.) One interpretative tool is to think of speech as a surface under which deep structures – i.e. values and norms – exist (Greimas & Courtes 1982; Greimas 1987). To our mind semiotics is very much about playing with two different levels of text: the syntagmatic surface which is more or less faithful to the grammar, and the paradigmatic, semantic structure of values and norms hidden in the deeper meanings of interpretations. Semiotic analysis deals precisely with the level of meaning which exists under the surface, but the only way to reach those meanings is through the textual level, the written or spoken text. That is why the tools are needed. In our studies, we have used the semiotic square and the actant analysis. The former is based on the distinctions and the categorisations of meanings, and the latter on opening the plotting of narratives in order to reach the value structures.

Antropología social y sociología argentinas : Identidades disciplinares en cuatro congresos

En este artículo se toman como objeto la antropología social y la sociología argentinas en su estado actual. Comenzando por un comentario general sobre la relación entre estas disciplinas y sobre su institucionalización en Argentina desde 1957, se pasa luego a la descripción de una de las hipotéticas dimensiones de su diferenciación basada en un análisis de componentes principales (ACP) sobre las ponencias presentadas en cuatro reuniones científicas en cuanto a la estructura de sus referentes teóricos y metodológicos. Los resultados muestran una superposición de referencias lo suficientemente importante como para asentar la idea de que las razones para la diferenciación entre estas disciplinas están lejos de obedecer a factores vinculados ala epistemología, la metodología o la teoría. Finalmente, retomando ideas de Abbott y Passeron, se argumenta sobre una posible comunidad única de cientistas sociales

Antropología social y sociología argentinas : Identidades disciplinares en cuatro congresos

En este artículo se toman como objeto la antropología social y la sociología argentinas en su estado actual. Comenzando por un comentario general sobre la relación entre estas disciplinas y sobre su institucionalización en Argentina desde 1957, se pasa luego a la descripción de una de las hipotéticas dimensiones de su diferenciación basada en un análisis de componentes principales (ACP) sobre las ponencias presentadas en cuatro reuniones científicas en cuanto a la estructura de sus referentes teóricos y metodológicos. Los resultados muestran una superposición de referencias lo suficientemente importante como para asentar la idea de que las razones para la diferenciación entre estas disciplinas están lejos de obedecer a factores vinculados ala epistemología, la metodología o la teoría. Finalmente, retomando ideas de Abbott y Passeron, se argumenta sobre una posible comunidad única de cientistas sociales

Antropología social y sociología argentinas : Identidades disciplinares en cuatro congresos

En este artículo se toman como objeto la antropología social y la sociología argentinas en su estado actual. Comenzando por un comentario general sobre la relación entre estas disciplinas y sobre su institucionalización en Argentina desde 1957, se pasa luego a la descripción de una de las hipotéticas dimensiones de su diferenciación basada en un análisis de componentes principales (ACP) sobre las ponencias presentadas en cuatro reuniones científicas en cuanto a la estructura de sus referentes teóricos y metodológicos. Los resultados muestran una superposición de referencias lo suficientemente importante como para asentar la idea de que las razones para la diferenciación entre estas disciplinas están lejos de obedecer a factores vinculados ala epistemología, la metodología o la teoría. Finalmente, retomando ideas de Abbott y Passeron, se argumenta sobre una posible comunidad única de cientistas sociales

An Architecture by means of Anthropology. Beyond learning the tools of social science

Los arquitectos y urbanistas tienen una larga tradición en el aprendizaje de las herramientas de las ciencias sociales, especialmente las que les permiten analizar y describir mejor los entornos y las personas para las que trabajan. Esto ha llevado a los arquitectos a desarrollar mejores herramientas de observación y descripción del ámbito social y no sólo el material. Sin embargo, la mayoría de las veces este acercamiento interdisciplinar ha identificado las ciencias sociales, especialmente la antropología, con la etnografía. Este artículo parte de la crítica a esta identificación hecha por el antropólogo Tim Ingold y se centra en lo que él propone como el método central de la antropología, la observación participante. Para después revisar varias propuestas actuales de científicos sociales que tratan de desarrollar una disciplina no representacional y orientada al futuro, un objetivo más cercano al de la arquitectura. El artículo intenta imaginar cómo esta práctica transdisciplinar podría desarrollarse.

De Gaulle and Europe: Historical Revision and Social Science Theory. Program for the Study of Germany and Europe Working Paper Series 8.5

The thousands of books and articles on Charles de Gaulle's policy toward European integration, whether written by historians, social scientists, or commentators, universally accord primary explanatory importance to the General's distinctive geopolitical ideology. In explaining his motivations, only secondary significance, if any at all, is attached to commercial considerations. This paper seeks to reverse this historiographical consensus by examining the four major decisions toward European integration during de Gaulle's presidency: the decisions to remain in the Common Market in 1958, to propose the Foucher Plan in the early 1960s, to veto British accession to the EC, and to provoke the "empty chair" crisis in 1965-1966, resulting in the "Luxembourg Compromise." In each case, the overwhelming bulk of the primary evidence-speeches, memoirs, or government documents-suggests that de Gaulle's primary motivation was economic, not geopolitical or ideological. Like his predecessors and successors, de Gaulle sought to promote French industry and agriculture by establishing protected markets for their export products. This empirical finding has three broader implications: (1) For those interesred in the European Union, it suggests that regional integration has been driven primarily by economic, not geopolitical considerations--even in the "least likely" case. (2) For those interested in the role of ideas in foreign policy, it suggests that strong interest groups in a democracy limit the impact of a leader's geopolitical ideology--even where the executive has very broad institutional autonomy. De Gaulle was a democratic statesman first and an ideological visionary second. (3) For those who employ qualitative case-study methods, it suggests that even a broad, representative sample of secondary sources does not create a firm basis for causal inference. For political scientists, as for historians, there is in many cases no reliable alternative to primary-source research.