Приказ основних података о документу
'Terenski rad u filozofiji' - Gerc i Burdije kao sagovornici
'Fieldwork in philosophy': Geertz and Bourdieu in dialogue
dc.creator | Spasić, Ivana | |
dc.creator | Gorunović, Gordana | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-10-12T11:36:18Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-10-12T11:36:18Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0038-0318 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1489 | |
dc.description.abstract | Za razliku od uobičajenog mišljenja da Kliford Gerc i Pjer Burdije oličavaju suprotstavljene paradigme u društvenoj nauci, ovde se pokušava pokazati da njih povezuje niz sličnosti na planu teorije, istraživačke prakse i etike naučnog rada. Posle kratkog prikaza stvarnog susreta ove dvojice naučnika ranih 1970ih godina, u tekstu se identifikuju sledeće tačke njihovog implicitnog i nenameravanog približavanja: 1) zamagljivanje međudisciplinarnih granica, 2) rad u Severnoj Africi, 3) odnos prema značajnim prethodnicima, 4) posvećenost terenskom radu i odbojnost prema 'velikoj teoriji', 5) postpozitivizam i anti-postmodernizam i 6) refleksivnost. Pri tom se ne zaboravlja ni na nesvodljive razlike među njima, zbog kojih ova vrsta uporedne analize ima svoje granice. Napokon, tvrdi se da su Gerc i Burdije propustili priliku da uđu u istinski dijalog i jedan od drugog nauče lekcije kojima su mogli dodatno ojačati vlastite naučne projekte. | sr |
dc.description.abstract | Unlike the standard view that Clifford Geertz and Pierre Bourdieu embody contrary social scientific paradigms, it is argued that they share a whole set of similarities in terms of theory, research practice, and scholarly ethics. After briefly presenting the details of their encounter in the early 1970s, the authors identify the following points of their implicit and unintended convergence: 1) blurring of interdisciplinary boundaries, 2) work in North Africa, 3) relation to important predecessors, 4) commitment to fieldwork and rejection of ’grand theory’, 5) postpositivism and anti-postmodernism, and 6) reflexivity. At the same time, irreducible differences between the two are noted, marking the outer limits of this kind of comparative analysis. Finally, it is argued that Geertz and Bourdieu missed the opportunity to enter a genuine dialogue and learn from each other lessons that may have helped them improve their respective scholarly projects. | en |
dc.publisher | Sociološko udruženje Srbije i Crne Gore, Beograd i Univerzitet u Beogradu - Filozofski fakultet - Institut za sociološka istraživanja, Beograd | |
dc.relation | info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MESTD/Basic Research (BR or ON)/177035/RS// | |
dc.relation | info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MESTD/Basic Research (BR or ON)/179049/RS// | |
dc.rights | openAccess | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | |
dc.source | Sociologija | |
dc.subject | terenski rad | sr |
dc.subject | refleksivnost | sr |
dc.subject | praksa | sr |
dc.subject | Pjer Burdije | sr |
dc.subject | Kliford Gerc | sr |
dc.subject | antropologija | sr |
dc.subject | reflexivity | en |
dc.subject | practice | en |
dc.subject | Pierre Bourdieu | en |
dc.subject | fieldwork | en |
dc.subject | Clifford Geertz | en |
dc.subject | anthropology | en |
dc.title | 'Terenski rad u filozofiji' - Gerc i Burdije kao sagovornici | sr |
dc.title | 'Fieldwork in philosophy': Geertz and Bourdieu in dialogue | en |
dc.type | article | |
dc.rights.license | BY-NC | |
dc.citation.epage | 422 | |
dc.citation.issue | 3 | |
dc.citation.other | 54(3): 401-422 | |
dc.citation.rank | M24 | |
dc.citation.spage | 401 | |
dc.citation.volume | 54 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.2298/SOC1203401S | |
dc.identifier.fulltext | http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/427/1486.pdf | |
dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-84868344525 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion |