Repositório RCAAP

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided

This study juxtaposes a survey of professors teaching in the faculties of Arts, humanites and sciences at the Universities of Paris and Berlin during the same period (1870-1939). It adopts a comparative prosopography to situate these two groups of university elites within their respective settings. The analysis brings to light two distinctive meritocratic models and patterns of change between the university communities through the comparison of changes in the social and geographic origins of professors as well as their branch of study and career patterns. Despite France’s centralization and elitist orientation, some social mobility existed, whereas in Germany decentralization and the absence of formal exam procedures continued to favor the same dominant groups over this period. Official attempts to impose the German model in France failed, as did the Weimar Republic’s attempts to modernize and democratize the academic profession. Between the wars, both the heightened tension and dominant social and political orientation of each group of professors were not, therefore, a product of the period. Rather they reflect the long term structural specificity of each university model and society. Above and beyond its empirical conclusions, this article seeks to valorize the heuristic usefulness of combining a comparative approach with that of social biography for the supranational study of Europe.

The aim of this article is to analyse the social stratification of the practitioners in sociology in France until the 1950s and, beyond, to search the reasons that have maintained sociology in a marginal status in the French university system during this period. First, I consider the Durkheimian School and present the data that explain the reason of its success in the rivalry with other practitioners in the discipline. Second, I argue that the Durkheimians occupied a dominated position inside the dominant group and, because of that, they could not subvert the rules of the French university system. On the contrary, they were assimilated by it and were submitted to play a role relegated to relation to the traditional stablished disciplines.

In this article, the author examines the social factors which determined the career of Paul F. Lazarsfeld, by attempting to determine the factors of discontinuity and those of continuity beyond discontinuity. Firstly, he analyses the youth of P.F. Lazarsfeld, in relation to the socialist and Jewish milieux of Vienna. He then proceeds to examine differential reactions to the problem of emigration, basing his study particularly on a comparison of the opposing attitudes of Adorno and P.F. Lazarsfeld. He then analyses the specific abilities which have enabled P.F. Lazarsfeld to father a new form of intellectual enterprise, relying on a rational division of labour and an almost industrial organization of intellectual output, this latter being achieved by means of a positivist methodology which enables him to segment and mechanize the various operations of the intellect. To conclude, he examines the strategies by which P.F. Lazarsfeld, supported by the policy of cultural missions, has contributed to the exportation, on the scale of Eastern and Western Europe, of American empiricist sociology, while at the same time promoting a model of the relationships between social research and economic and political agents as elaborated in the United States during the nineteen twenties and thirties, via a strategy of capturing new intellectual markets at the very time when strategies of modernisation and ideological reconquest where taking place in Europe.

With the Second World War, science became an essential component of power: after Hiroshima, no one could deny this anymore. Therefore, the western states invested massively in big science, which relies on large-scale projects and massive government funding, following the war-born American mode of knowledge production. Confronted with the apparition of a new regime of production of scientific facts, the universities faced the necessary implementation of a new regime of production of scientific elites. However, the structures of the French academic field changed only gradually; governments of the 1940’s and 1950’s seemed to bet on the homothety of the preexisting system, without any global policy. This article focus on the mobilization of the scientists themselves in favor of a new organization of the scientist’s craft, through a consensus requesting the State to plannify the scientific growth. As a matter of fact, after the first fruitful failures of these mobilization, a system of science policy was created starting from 1956-1958.

In June 1941 a colloquium on “the psychology and the history of technics and labour” was organized in Toulouse with the participation of several important social sciences researchers of the interwar period (Marc Bloch, Lucien Febvre, Marcel Mauss, Georges Friedmann, Ignace Meyerson and others). This scientific encounter was one of the rare moments of collective reflection that could be held during World War II in the French social sciences in spite of the violent political charges brought against them by Vichy regime. This 1941 colloquium attests the efforts made in order to reaffirm the social and political role of the social sciences of the Durkheimian tradition: in a context of strong politicisation, their intellectual project, because it had to be defended, was clarified and expanded in its different aspects: the scientific mode of organisation it involved, the particular perspective it adopted on the social and political crisis and also the affinities it had with the ideology of progress.

This paper seeks to present some research results about higher education professors as a social category in Brazil and, in addition, to point some basic problems and limits of this type of study in such conditions. When dealing with higher education professors as social category, the study presents some results from an examination of census sources and from de application of questionnaires. In this application of questionnaires, institutions and samples of professors representatives of distinct conditions relating to social position and to professional conditions and exercise were framed. Regarding the problems and limits of this type of study, it points out to the “practical” conceptions of the uses of the Social Sciences.

These articles is inspired on the sociology of academic field of Pierre Bourdieu and on the tradition of structural analysis of the history of the USP to, by the reconstruction of its social structure, analyze its most important symbolic representation: the crest. The article shows that the USP social structure is better described by an opposition between its traditional professional pole and its academic-scientific pole. To do so, it mobilizes the data available in the USP Statistical Yearbook and Fuvest Socioeconomic Questionnaire, and performs an iconographic analysis of the USP Coat of Arms.

Internationalization is considered a fundamental process to improve the quality of higher education and scientific research. It is considered also as a result of contemporary globalization and its demands. One of the main aspects of the internationalization, the transnational mobility of students and researchers, is pursued and emphasized by the different policies and actors which promote it. This article analyzes internationalization as a historical dynamic that in the first decades of the 20th century was associated with the cultural diplomacy policies of the European countries and the United States. In this sense, it intends to show how it was articulated with the intense nationalism of the period and with the effort to change power correlations through the conquest of niches of cultural sympathy. The analysis focuses on the cultural diplomacy of Germany during the Weimar Republic and the Nazi regime, the country that was the protagonist of the two world wars. In Germany, the encouragement of the exchange of researchers and scholars assumed specific meanings, related to the international isolation after the Treaty of Versailles and with the ambition to obtain cultural and political hegemony. The strategies to achieve these goals varied according to the political context. The article shows details some initiatives directed to the Latin American countries, mainly to Brazil.

The article presents the intellectual environment of production of the laboratory of experimental physiology of the Ozório brothers, seen as one of the meeting points of the Carioca intellectual elite in the first half of the 20th century. The Ozório brothers (Álvaro, Miguel and Branca) engaged, in the national context, in the debates about the enhancement of the scientific research raised by the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and the Brazilian Academy of Education. In addition, they also sought to establish close contact with scientists in other countries and ensured the recognition from his peers abroad of the scientific production carried out at the Brazilian laboratories. In this article, we analyze how Ozório brothers searched to improve the institutionalization of the physiological researches in Rio de Janeiro and the establishment of intellectual exchanges with the French academic environment in the 1920‘s.

This article re-examines a debate that classical scholars took for especially meaningful in their field during the second half of the twentieth century: the discussion over the nature of the ancient (Greek and Roman) economy and the proper way to approach it. The debate is/was structured around opposite pairs: “primitivist” vs. “modernist” was the main opposition from which related forms of antagonism unfolded. Those who took part in the debate often referred to it as a conceptual trap and as an obstacle to progress in the field of ancient economic history. Considering recent literature on scientific and philosophical controversies, I propose to analyse how the debate institutes its own social logic and establishes the conditions of its reproduction. I will argue that: 1) the fixation of a founding dichotomy works as a catalysing factor of the “oikos controversy”; 2) every proclaimed attempt to overcome dichotomy is doomed to a ritual assimilation to one of the original parts in dispute. My primary sources are to be found in scholarly work on the ancient economy and letters exchanged between the debaters.

Esta entrevista é resultado de diversos encontros que tivemos, em SãoPaulo e em Paris, entre dezembro de 2016 e janeiro de 2017, e sua formafinal foi retrabalhada com intervenções por escrito do entrevistado6. O objetivofoi conhecer sua trajetória e seus interesses de pesquisa, bem comoentender sua participação no grupo fundado por Pierre Bourdieu e, maislargamente, o próprio empreendimento de pesquisa construído coletivamentecom as diversas gerações de “alunos-herdeiros”. Duval pertenceu à última geração formada no Centre de Sociologie Européenne (CSE) enquanto Bourdieu ainda era vivo e, por isso, sua experiência intelectual se inscreve nas transformações pelas quais passou o projeto intelectual de Bourdieu e do grupo de pesquisadores ligados a ele, no contexto mais amplo de suas relações com as instituições de ensino e pesquisa na França. O relato em primeira pessoa expõe com densidade a experiência particular de um pesquisador que, articulada ao contexto histórico, institucional e intelectual francês do fim do século XX, permite vislumbrar algumas das condições de enraizamento e de reprodução da sociologia bourdieusiana na França.

This paper analyzes Portuguese official discourses and the institutional speeches by immigrant associations regarding the (re) (de) construction of the imaginary around the “Woman Brazilian Immigrant” in Portugal. For this purpose, the Discourse Analysis method is used, under a Foucaultian inspiration; employing the techniques of documentary research and interviewing. In the theoretical perspective, it is inserted in the debates on Feminization of the Migrations and Coloniality of the Gender. The conclusions point out that most institutional discourses reproduce elements of the hypersexualization imaginary of Brazilian women.

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided

No summary/description provided