KOPS - Das Institutionelle Repositorium der Universität Konstanz

Geschichte versus Genealogie : Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivität die Ethnomethodologie vergaß

Geschichte versus Genealogie : Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivität die Ethnomethodologie vergaß

Zitieren

Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Prüfsumme: MD5:710a51cbccb26dbea04da5277eedff98

LANGENOHL, Andreas, 2009. Geschichte versus Genealogie : Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivität die Ethnomethodologie vergaß. In: Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung. 10(3), 4

@article{Langenohl2009Gesch-6457, title={Geschichte versus Genealogie : Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivität die Ethnomethodologie vergaß}, year={2009}, number={3}, volume={10}, journal={Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung}, author={Langenohl, Andreas}, note={Article Number: 4} }

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/6457"> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-24T16:22:45Z</dcterms:available> <dc:rights>deposit-license</dc:rights> <dcterms:title>Geschichte versus Genealogie : Warum die Debatte um sozialwissenschaftliche Reflexivität die Ethnomethodologie vergaß</dcterms:title> <dcterms:issued>2009</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>Zuerst ersch. in: Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung 10 (2009), 3, Art. 4</dcterms:bibliographicCitation> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/6457"/> <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-24T16:22:45Z</dc:date> <dc:creator>Langenohl, Andreas</dc:creator> <dc:language>deu</dc:language> <dc:contributor>Langenohl, Andreas</dc:contributor> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-20140905103416863-3868037-7"/> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">This paper addresses the almost complete disappearance of ethnomethodological approaches from the reflexivity debate in social-scientific theory and methodology since the 1980s. This disappearance is remarkable because many of the tropes and questions characterizing the debate around reflexivity had already been articulated in ethnomethodology. The main reason for this neglect, it is argued, is the productive effect it had, as it helped later debates find answers to the epistemological challenge of postmodern approaches entering sociological discourse from the direction of anthropology and science and technology studies. Those answers could never have stabilized in the presence of the fundamental ethnomethodological presupposition that reflexivity is an ontological feature of social reality. The paper ends with a number of suggestions concerning a revision of reflexivity in the social sciences, highlighting the performative aspects of social meaning, especially social-scientific meaning.</dcterms:abstract> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

Dateiabrufe seit 01.10.2014 (Informationen über die Zugriffsstatistik)

Langenohl1.pdf 171

Das Dokument erscheint in:

KOPS Suche


Stöbern

Mein Benutzerkonto