株式会社極東書店トップ商品一覧Social Cohesion Contested.

商品詳細

Social Cohesion Contested.

Social Cohesion Contested.

・ISBN 978-1-5381-7662-7 hard GB£ 75.00

¥23,760.- (税込) (※)価格はご注文時の参考価格となります。
納品価格につきましては書籍の入荷時点で確定となります。
版元の原価改定、外国為替の変動等により異なる場合がございますので、予めご了承下さい。

お気に入り

電子版あり 大学・学術機関向け電子ブック(eBook)ISBN 978-1-5381-7664-1

電子版あり 大学・学術機関向け電子ブック(eBook)ISBN 979-82-16-42671-4

著者・編者Swain, Dan / Urban, Petr,
シリーズOff the Fence: Morality, Politics and Society
出版社(Rowman & Littlefield, US)
出版年月2024.01
ページ数156 pp.
言語ENG
ニュース番号<712-553 712-65>

解説

In recent decades social cohesion has emerged as a major concern of states, policymakers and researchers. Social cohesion is represented as a desirable policy goal and as the basis for everything from economic growth to individual well-being. At the same time, it is increasingly presented as a single substance, which can be measured, tracked, and compared across diverse societies. But why should we think of the complex ways in which we can live well together in terms of a single substance? Social Cohesion Contested challenges this way of thinking, suggesting that social cohesion has become a buzzword that obscures more than it illuminates.
Dan Swain and Petr Urban trace the rise of the concept through the policy agendas of transnational and international bodies, and analyze the reactions of social researchers to the demands of policymakers for a clear and operationalizable concept. They argue that the term is frequently used in a way that assumes broad understanding and agreement, while in practice it is subject to contradictory definitions and often loaded with various implicit and explicit values, which become masked behind a veneer of scientific authority and normative legitimacy. The more that social cohesion is treated as a single substance with a clear and uncontroversial meaning, the more it narrows the space for debate and contestation around both the policies adopted in its name and the understanding of the social on which it rests. In contrast, if social cohesion is to mean anything it ought to be understood explicitly as a contested concept, and actively subject to contestation. The book thus provides not only a critique of a popular concept, but an example of engaged philosophical criticism of social research and policy.