https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3210-060X
![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This contribution presents an analysis of the structure and conflictual dynamics of contemporary German sociology which has recently separated into two professional societies. Using geometric data analysis, we present an empirical construction of the power/knowledge structure of the field, its paradigmatic plurality, and the various forms of sociological practices involved.
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authora, upon reasonable request.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 The recent movement of an ‘analytical sociology’ continues the program of methodological individualism with a rationalist orientation, but it is more open to structures and relations between actors and pays less attention to the actors and their actions. (see Hedström, Citation2005)
5 We would like to thank our students for their invaluable help with the data collection.
6 In German sociology, as in German academia in general, there are virtually no permanent positions available besides professorships, making them the main guarantee of a long-term engagement in sociology. This includes professorships at universities of applied sciences (FH, Fachhochschulen), where great importance is attached to the practical application of knowledge (e.g., consulting) and the teaching load is twice as high as for a university professor, reducing time available for research and publishing.
7 All calculations were done in SPAD 9.1.44.
8 For the MCA we discuss only active categories contributing more than one and a half times the mean of 0.38% to an axis and in the case of dichotomous variables only the positive category in text and graphs for a more comprehensive interpretation (see Table A1 in the Appendix). Passive categories are printed in italics in the text and the graphs for better readability.
9 This concept, developed by Hartmut Esser, is similar to Boudon’s model of action-based explanation.
10 The average position of women is indeed an unfavorable one in terms of symbolic capital and capital volume. However, as the field theory perspective teaches us, it is not a purely passive position of oppression; rather, being female has become a valuable asset in contemporary German sociology and women have a better chance of obtaining a professorship than men (see Lutter & Schröder, Citation2016). This benefit arises from the very fact of historically established domination of women in science: today, being oppressed can become a legitimate criterion, often overruling other paradigmatic criteria.
11 Both authors of the present article are located to the left and slightly above the centroid, thus indicating our moderate relevance in the field.
12 The technical online appendix reports statistical tests on the comparison between the AS group and the overall sample population.
13 At the time of conducting the study, of 197 sociologists involved with the AS, 118 were also involved with the DGS.
14 For all contributions of active categories to the first three axis of the CSA see online appendix table OA1. For the variances of the axes of the CSA see table A2.
15 The first axis of the CSA is almost orthogonal (88°) to the first axis of the MCA, but shows a similar alignment as the second axis of the MCA (39°), see online appendix table OA2.
16 This development reflects a distinction already known from philosophy, which has split into analytical philosophy and continental philosophy; and just as analytical philosophy increasingly took up classical questions of philosophy over time, we expect that analytical sociology will soon strive to appropriate methods, data types, and scientific issues that are today represented by the DGS. Specifically, this should very soon include statistical procedures formerly considered ‘merely exploratory,’ i.e., dimensionality reduction procedures. Also, bits and pieces of paradigms that are relatively close to the AS position in the field may well soon fall within the scope of the AS, not least elements of Bourdieusian theory (habitus, field) and methodology, as well as other relational approaches.
17 It should be pointed out that quite a few sociologists do not engage in positive or negative assessments, which may in part have to do with the fact that their strategies do not refer to the two paradigmatic poles of the field nor to its institutional dimension. For example, German organizational sociologists are strongly oriented toward European organizational studies rather than toward other branches of German sociology.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg
Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg, is assistant professor for sociology at University of Potsdam. His main areas of interest are in transnationalization and European integration, political sociology of economic thought, field and discourse analysis, and relational sociology. His current research concerns the dynamics of academic fields with a focus on the disciplines of German sociology, German and French economics and European economic experts. His work has been published in Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie, European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, and Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales.
Andreas Schmitz
Andreas Schmitz, is full professor for sociology. His main areas of interest are relational theory and methodology, computational social sciences, mixed-methods, empirical sociology of culture, and the sociology of emotions. His current research concerns the analysis of digital spheres and the mobilization of techniques from computer studies. His work has been published in Quality and Quantity, The American Sociologist, The Sociological Review, Current Sociology, and Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales.